Gig Economy | Deliveroo riders are not employees, UK's Supreme Court rules

Deliveroo riders are not employees, UK's Supreme Court rules

Deliveroo’s delivery riders should not be classed as employees, the UK’s highest court has ruled.

The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the gig economy giant’s riders cannot be represented by a trade union for the purposes of collective bargaining.

The Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB) had tried to represent a group of Deliveroo riders in order to negotiate pay and conditions with the company, Reuters said.

The union was first refused permission in 2017 on the basis that riders were not "workers" under UK labour law and it has since mounted a number of appeals.

The IWGB took its case to the UK's highest court in April, arguing that it was an unlawful interference with riders' human rights to deny the IWGB's application to be recognised by Deliveroo for collective bargaining.

But the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the IWGB's appeal in a ruling on Tuesday.

Announcing the court's decision, Judge Vivien Rose said Deliveroo riders do not have an "employment relationship" with Deliveroo and were not entitled to compulsory collective bargaining.

The Supreme Court said in its written ruling that Deliveroo riders could appoint a substitute to undertake a delivery, can work for competitors, do not have to work specific hours or even carry out any deliveries at all.

These features of the relationship between Deliveroo and its riders are "fundamentally inconsistent with any notion of an employment relationship".

A Deliveroo spokesperson said: "UK courts repeatedly and at every level have confirmed that Deliveroo riders are self-employed, and this now includes the Supreme Court, the highest court in the country.

"This is a positive judgment for Deliveroo riders, who value the flexibility that self-employed work offers."

Colin Leckey, a lawyer at Lewis Silkin who represented Deliveroo, said the decision provided certainty for platform economy companies with highly flexible operating models in which individuals have genuine freedom about whether and when to work.

"The question of whether such persons are 'workers' under domestic law had long since been resolved in Deliveroo's favour, and now arguments based on human rights law have been finally decided for the company as well," he said.

The IWGB said in a statement that the ruling was disappointing, and it was considering its options.

The union added: "Whether reflected in legislation or not, couriers are joining the union in ever bigger numbers and building our collective power to take action and hold companies like Deliveroo to account.

Read more from us

"Our strength lies not in court rulings but in our unity as a workforce coming together to demand change."

Andrew Willis, Associate Director of Legal at Croner, told HR Grapevine: “The status of Deliveroo drivers, who were previously found to be self-employed, is at the heart of this case. It serves as a useful reminder that it is imperative that organisations correctly categorise those who work for them, and they should be prepared for it to come under scrutiny.

“Despite what the terms of a contract might say, tribunals have the ability to assess the reality of the situation when it comes to employment status. If the relationship between the parties does not reflect what is outlined in the contract, tribunals can determine that individuals are a different employment status and are entitled to additional employment rights. This can leave an organisation liable for claims of holiday pay and the minimum wage if individuals are found in reality not to be self-employed. Getting it right from the start is consequently crucial.”



You are currently previewing this article.

This is the last preview available to you for the next 30 days.

To access more news, features, columns and opinions every day, create a free myGrapevine account.