Uber London akin to modern day slavery

renod babek

Well-Known Member
Uber's main argument for why it doesn't need to give driver's worker benefits is flawed, lawyer claims.

  • Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam took Uber to court last October over their employment status and won.
  • They wanted to be classed as workers that are entitled to rights such as holiday pay and minimum wage.
  • Uber believes that its drivers are "self-employed" and appealed against the ruling on Wednesday. The driver's legal team fought back on Thursday.
  • The San Francisco-headquartered taxi giant has brought in barrister Dinah Rose QC to fight its corner while Jason Galbraith-Marten QC is representing the drivers.
  • The outcome of the appeal could have major implications on the wider gig economy in the UK.
  • Uber is wrong to try and classify itself as a driver's "agent" in the UK, a lawyer representing Uber drivers told a court on Thursday.

    Uber is currently appealing a court ruling passed last October that found British Uber drivers are entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay. The San Francisco company's key argument is that it acts as a driver's agent (like many traditional taxi companies) and not their employer.

    But Jason Galbraith-Marten QC, a former labour and employment lawyer of the year winner, told Judge Jennifer Eady QC in court on Thursday that "there is no document in which drivers appoint Uber as their agent," before going on to state a number of other reasons that illustrate why Uber is not an agent.

    In a bid to further dismiss Uber's claim that its drivers are not workers, Galbraith-Marten QC pointed to the fact that drivers can "breach" their contract with Uber by cancelling trips.

    He continued to pick apart Uber's appeal point-by-point and was on his feet for around two and a half hours before the courtroom broke for lunch.



    The appeal comes after a judge ruled that Uber drivers are entitled to worker benefits
    Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam took Uber to court last October over their employment status and won.

    They specifically argued that they should be classed as workers, who are entitled to paid annual leave, minimum wage, and breaks.

    Farrar told Business Insider on Thursday lunchtime that he thinks Uber will struggle to turnover the appeal, despite spending what he expects is a sizeable sum on a top lawyer.

    He also criticised Uber for aspiring to be like other minicab companies. "The entire minicab industry has been a festering source of labour abuse for decades. Now Uber aspires to be just like the worst." Interestingly, Dominick Moxon-Tritsch, Uber's former head of public policy, described the minicab model as "brutally exploitative" in 2014.

    Speaking at a protest held outside the court before the hearing on Wednesday, Aslam said:

    "In the case of Uber, drivers are stuck into working due to desperation, either by costly finance, insurance, licence fees, and the list goes on... People talk about slave labour and exploitation in third world countries, but hey, we have sweated labour and workers being exploited on the street of London."All Uber want to do is flood the market with drivers, with no responsibility nor liability - keep reducing fares to attract more customers, while drivers carry all the risks."These drivers are hard-working people and in their job face many struggles. Drivers sleeping in their cars, drivers working 80/90 hours a week and still not making the minimum wage. Not seeing their family, the stress and pressure of the job - these very same drivers have been pushed into hardship by Uber."
    The Californian transport company has always maintained that drivers who use its platform are independent contractors. It frames itself as a technology platform, connecting riders and drivers and taking a fee in the process.
    Uber is wrong to try and classify itself as a driver's "agent" in the UK, a lawyer representing Uber drivers told a court on Thursday.

    Uber is currently appealing a court ruling passed last October that found British Uber drivers are entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay. The San Francisco company's key argument is that it acts as a driver's agent (like many traditional taxi companies) and not their employer.

    But Jason Galbraith-Marten QC, a former labour and employment lawyer of the year winner, told Judge Jennifer Eady QC in court on Thursday that "there is no document in which drivers appoint Uber as their agent," before going on to state a number of other reasons that illustrate why Uber is not an agent.

    In a bid to further dismiss Uber's claim that its drivers are not workers, Galbraith-Marten QC pointed to the fact that drivers can "breach" their contract with Uber by cancelling trips.

    He continued to pick apart Uber's appeal point-by-point and was on his feet for around two and a half hours before the courtroom broke for lunch.



    The appeal comes after a judge ruled that Uber drivers are entitled to worker benefits
    Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam took Uber to court last October over their employment status and won.

    They specifically argued that they should be classed as workers, who are entitled to paid annual leave, minimum wage, and breaks.

    Farrar told Business Insider on Thursday lunchtime that he thinks Uber will struggle to turnover the appeal, despite spending what he expects is a sizeable sum on a top lawyer.

    He also criticised Uber for aspiring to be like other minicab companies. "The entire minicab industry has been a festering source of labour abuse for decades. Now Uber aspires to be just like the worst." Interestingly, Dominick Moxon-Tritsch, Uber's former head of public policy, described the minicab model as "brutally exploitative" in 2014.

    Speaking at a protest held outside the court before the hearing on Wednesday, Aslam said:

    "In the case of Uber, drivers are stuck into working due to desperation, either by costly finance, insurance, licence fees, and the list goes on... People talk about slave labour and exploitation in third world countries, but hey, we have sweated labour and workers being exploited on the street of London."All Uber want to do is flood the market with drivers, with no responsibility nor liability - keep reducing fares to attract more customers, while drivers carry all the risks."These drivers are hard-working people and in their job face many struggles. Drivers sleeping in their cars, drivers working 80/90 hours a week and still not making the minimum wage. Not seeing their family, the stress and pressure of the job - these very same drivers have been pushed into hardship by Uber."
    The Californian transport company has always maintained that drivers who use its platform are independent contractors. It frames itself as a technology platform, connecting riders and drivers and taking a fee in the process.
 

Mars Troll Number 4

Well-Known Member
No... slavery is not the case at all..

Normally with slavery, the owner provides the equipment nessisary for the slave to do their work, as well as feeds and housing them.

If uber provided a car to sleep/work in, gasoline, paid all expenses... THEN it would be slavery,

Uber is just a scam, they arn't providing enough for it to actually be slavery.
 
Top