Ruling on December 5, 2018
Authority: High Court of Justice
Parties: Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain (IWGB) / Central Arbitration Comittee & Deliveroo
Subject: Possibility of collective bargaining on behalf of Deliveroo "Riders".
Summary of facts: The Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain (the Union) has applied to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) to be admitted to collective bargaining under the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 for a group of Deliveroo Riders living in London. The CAC decided that the Riders are not employees within the meaning of the 1992 Act and the Union therefore do not qualify for recognition. The CAC based this decision on the right of substitution, in the sense that the Riders can let themselves be replaced for free, both before and after the acceptance of a certain job. The Riders do this in practice. The Union has challenged the decision.
Legal question: Can collective bargaining take place on behalf of a group of Deliveroo Riders?
Considerations: The High Court follows the decision of the CAC that the Uber drivers are not employees but self-employed, now that they have the right to be freely replaced. Self-employed workers do not have the right of freedom of association, including the right to collective bargaining, under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Union is thus not competent to negotiate collectively on behalf of the Uber drivers.
Ruling: The claims on appeal are dismissed.