Labour got one back at capital on Friday, after an employment tribunal in London found that Uber’s circa 30,000 drivers in the city are actually its workers after all, and accordingly deserve employment protection. With potentially epic consequences for its costs, its tax bill, and the entire gig economy, that would mean Uber is no longer a mere intermediary platform. At least in the tribunal’s eyes. The ruling might not bind other courts, and of course Uber is going to appeal. Still, on the other hand, there’s another interesting thread in the judgment: what Uber claims to be, and how that stands up in court. The next time someone says Uber isn’t a taxi or transportation company, but something much more wonderful — justifying its considerable valuation and explaining why Saudi Arabia is pouring money into it — you might now direct them to paragraphs 85 onwards of the reasoning for the ruling, as written by Judge Snelson and members of the tribunal.
Joseph Cotterill considers the following as important: Labour, Private Equity, uber, Uncategorised
This could be interesting, too:
Simon Wren-lewis writes The day Theresa May lied in parliament about something I wrote
Simon Wren-lewis writes MMT and Labour’s fiscal rule
Simon Wren-lewis writes There is a Brexit deal the country can live with, but the government cannot
Simon Wren-lewis writes Would a Corbyn Brexit heal the nation or wound Labour?
Labour got one back at capital on Friday, after an employment tribunal in London