Remember the Uber employee or not case?

[anonymous-user]

Today is the first day of the Supreme Court hearing on the matter. Scheduled for 2 days

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2019-0029.h...

Issue(s)

Whether the Respondents were "workers" providing personal services to the Second Appellant.

If the Respondents were "workers", what periods constituted their "working time".

Extract of facts

"Following a preliminary hearing, the Employment Tribunal found that the Respondents were "workers" and that they were "working" whenever they (a) had the Appellants’ app switched on; (b) were within the territory in which they were authorised to work; and (c) were able and willing to accept assignments. These findings were upheld by the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. The Appellants now appeal to the Supreme Court."

[anonymous-user]

Ewan McGaughey wrote up a summary on twitter. He is no fan of the way Uber works and predicts it will lose in the SC

https://twitter.com/ewanmcg/status/128586972432528...


The general consensus I have seen is that Uber picked a superb QC to represent it in this case (no argument there, she really is top drawer), but that despite her best efforts, the hill is too big to climb.

Let's see. I think Dinah Rose did an absolutely cracking job for Uber. Jason Galbraith Martin made the case against Uber very well too. His focus on the 'micro management' of drivers by Uber and the way he amplified most of the points that led the tribunal, previous appeals and other cases from around the world to find as they did were very strong.