Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
AIUI Uber were taking liberties, wanting to have their cake and eat it, restricting their drivers in various ways as if these were employees, and that is probably one reason why Uber lost this case.
For [Uber] to be stating to its statutory regulator that it is operating a private hire vehicle service in London and is a fit and proper person to do so, while at the same time arguing in this litigation that it is merely an affiliate of a Dutch-registered company which licenses tens of thousands of proprietors of small businesses to use its software, contributes to the air of contrivance and artificiality which pervade’s Uber’s case.
Bwaha, nice. I think people often forget that, contrary to court room TV, Judges do have the intelligence and authority to read between the lines.
I hope they win! And that the thousands of other Uber drivers who lose their jobs when Uber decides enough is enough and goes home will be happy. Surely, if you don't like the T&C's you just don't work for them?
The Guardian seems (to me) to be gloating, as if these drivers have flipped off the man, and will now keep their jobs and get additional rights. I suspect it won't work that way.
Surely, if you don't like the T&C's you just don't work for them?
Absolutely, still dunno what the Match Girls were whinging about. Without the rule of law, corporations are free to rule in tyranny and the whole thing becomes a race to the bottom. Personally, I don't fancy a return to Victorian Factory conditions.
Comment