UK Uber wage ruling puts gig workers in box seat

Workers in Australia’s gig economy could be one step closer to getting a minimum wage and paid holidays, after Uber announced it was changing the status of its 70,000 drivers in Britain.

Workers in Australia’s gig economy could be one step closer to getting a minimum wage and paid holidays, after Uber announced it was changing the status of its 70,000 drivers in Britain following a court ruling there that they should be classified as workers and not independent contractors.

The company acknowledged on Tuesday that as “workers” — a UK employment classification that does not directly correspond to the Australian definition of “employee” — British Uber drivers will be entitled to a minimum wage and paid holiday time.

But the ride-hailing giant almost immediately began to walk back the landmark Supreme Court decision by claiming it ­applied only when drivers were actually carrying passengers, not the whole time they’re working.

In the past, Australian courts have found that drivers using the Uber App are independent contractors. But employment law specialists told The Australian the decision of Britain’s Supreme Court would increase the likelihood of a legal challenge in Australia to classify Uber drivers and others as employees.

The British case began in 2016 when Uber drivers Yaseen Aslam and James Farrar took the company to an employment tribunal, arguing they worked for Uber. The company maintained that the pair were self-­employed and it therefore was not responsible for paying any minimum wage or holiday pay. After a protracted five-year legal battle, Uber lost an appeal to the Supreme Court last month.

Uber drivers in Britain will now earn the British minimum wage of just over $15 an hour, get holiday pay equivalent to about 12 per cent of their earnings, and be ­enrolled in a pension plan.

In Australia the minimum wage is $19.84 an hour, but most ride-share drivers earn an average of only $12 an hour.

Uber claims the British decision is not relevant to Australia because “worker” is a legal classification that is specific to that country and different to both an employee and someone who is self-employed.

But University of Adelaide employment law specialist Andrew Stewart said what was central to the British decision was the way the court analysed the arrangements Uber had with its drivers, focusing on the reality of the work, not the wording of its contracts. “Uber’s argument was the drivers are not working for us, we are working for the drivers. We don’t provide a passenger transport service, we’re a technology company,” he said.

“And the Supreme Court tore that argument to shreds. They said, that’s nonsense. These drivers don’t have their own businesses. They don’t even know who their clients are; in fact they’re forbidden from actually contacting their clients. They don’t set the fees. They can even be told which route to drive.”

An Uber spokesperson told The Australian that there were “other reform solutions” that could be pursued in Australia, and that it wanted to provide “stronger benefits and protections for independent contractors in the gig economy”.

“Requirements for platform companies to provide insurance and other minimum standards, could help improve independent work,” the spokesperson said.