Stay updated with breaking news from Uber london ltd. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Pa Manjang told an East London employment tribunal that on multiple occasions the software wrongly decided his selfies were someone else and that it is racially biased . ....
Uber defended its business model against a legal assault by drivers in court on Tuesday, telling judges that its app does not flout licensing rules because the company does not enter into a contract with passengers booking a ride. ....
UK Litigation Roundup: Here's What You Missed In London law360.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from law360.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
One star rating for Uber drivers prolonged commute to the employment station Search Polity Note: Search is limited to the most recent 250 articles. To access earlier articles, click Advanced Search and set an earlier date range. To search for a term containing the & symbol, click Advanced Search and use the search headings and/or in first paragraph options. With. Clear Search Sponsored by Sponsored by The United Kingdom Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether or not the Uber drivers (claimants) were employees of Uber BV and if the answer is to the affirmative, the employees would have a right to be covered by the National Minimum Wage Act. ....
On the facts found in the present case, the employment tribunal (the ET) had been entitled to find that the respondent drivers were ‘workers’ who worked for Uber London under ‘worker’s contracts’, within the meaning of the statutory definition (s 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996). The Supreme Court (the court), in dismissing Uber’s appeal, held that that had been the only conclusion which the ET could reasonably have reached and, accordingly, it affirmed the conclusion of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, and that of the majority of the Court of Appeal, that the ET had been entitled to decide both questions in the respondents’ favour. Further, the court held that the ET had note erred in finding that: (i) periods during which its three conditions were met constituted ‘working time’ for the purpose of the Working Time Regulations 1998, SI 1998/1833; (ii) drivers’ working hours should be classified as ‘unmeasured work’, and (iii) the respondents’ work ....