‘Arts employers could be breaking the law by relying on unpaid interns to perform roles that should be left to paid workers, preventing young people from working-class backgrounds from gaining a foothold, experts have said.’
The Guardian, 26th February 2025
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Shameless businesses who commit serious offences will be banned from sponsoring overseas workers to crack down on visa abuse and prevent exploitation.’
Home Office, 28th November 2024
Source: www.gov.uk
‘More than 1,200 garment workers in Leicester were illegally underpaid over the last five years, figures obtained by the BBC have revealed.’
BBC News, 19th November 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Autumn Budget 2024 (“the Budget”) saw history being made as Rachel Reeves, who became our first female Chancellor of the Exchequer, set out arguably the biggest tax changes for a generation, set to raise taxes by £41bn by 2029/30 and said to be part of the Government’s plan to revitalise Britain. In this article, we will summarise the key reforms of the Budget, highlighting those which may be of particular relevance to financial remedy practitioners and their clients.’
Financial Remedies Journal, 1st November 2024
Source: financialremediesjournal.com
‘Royal Mail is being sued for classifying delivery drivers as self-employed, enabling it to avoid paying sick pay and the minimum wage, in a case that mirrors a landmark gig economy legal ruling against Uber.’
The Guardian, 25th February 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A group of toilet cleaners and attendants for London’s most famous parks could be about to make legal history in the court of appeal by arguing that their outsourced contracts amounted to indirect race discrimination.’
The Guardian, 20th February 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A fitter working for the furniture chain Sharps Bedrooms is taking legal action for better employment rights in a case that could open the door to improving conditions and pay for thousands of gig economy workers fitting kitchens, bathrooms and cupboards for big chains.’
The Guardian, 2nd January 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Legislation aimed at boosting seafarers’ pay has passed its final hurdle but may not immediately improve earnings.’
The Independent, 23rd March 2023
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A law firm is seeking to launch a group action against Amazon over employee rights for delivery drivers.’
BBC News, 13th October 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Pret, McColls and Welcome Break are among almost 200 firms “named and shamed” by the government for not paying workers the minimum wage.’
BBC News, 5th August 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Establishing an individual’s employment rights can feel like a minefield, with varying degrees of obligations on the employer depending on the employment status. Earlier this year the Supreme Court upheld earlier decisions in the Employment Tribunal, Employment Appeal Tribunal and Court of Appeal that Uber drivers are “workers” of Uber for the purposes of employment rights, and not, as Uber argued, self-employed contractors each operating their own minicab business.
Mills & Reeve, 14th June 2021
Source: www.mills-reeve.com
‘The Supreme Court decision in Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake and Shannon v Rampersad & Another (T/A Clifton House Residential Home) [2021] UKSC 8 (“Mencap”) can only be described as a bitter blow to low paid, hard-working care workers who have been at the forefront of the most essential work during the ongoing global pandemic. In emotional terms it is hard to comprehend how such workers can feel anything other than betrayed and devalued as a result. The decision is, in the context of the great efforts by these workers, quite simply crushing. In legal terms, the decision also generates real concerns about the fragmentation of a basic minimum labour standard – the wage floor. One difficulty is the legal framework that workers have to rely on in relation to minimum wage protection in the UK. Further concerns also relate to the approach taken by the Supreme Court to the concept of time to be considered working (“work time”) in relation to the National Minimum Wage (“NMW”).’
UK Labour Law, 28th April 2021
Source: uklabourlawblog.com
‘Alasdair Henderson of 1 Crown Office Row joins Rosalind English to discuss the recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court that drivers whose work is arranged through Uber’s smartphone app work for Uber under workers’ contracts and so qualify for the protections afforded by employment law, such as minimum wage and paid holiday leave.’
Law Pod UK, 7th April 2021
Source: audioboom.com
‘Care workers who “sleep-in” are not entitled to the national minimum wage when they are in bed, the Supreme Court has ruled.’
Law Society's Gazette, 19th March 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘On Wednesday Uber, the taxi hailing app, began offering 70,000 UK drivers a minimum hourly wage, holiday pay and pensions after years of legal battles.’
The Guardian, 18th March 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘If we had to pick one among the many enlightening statements from the UK Supreme Court’s judgment in Uber, it would be this. It perfectly captures both the gist of the case at hand and the substance of the whole global debate on platform work. From the outset, the narrative driven by platforms was based on the notion that they were something entirely new in our societies. They were introducing entirely novel work models, made possible by technology, which could not be subject to the same regulation that traditional businesses had to observe. Their business model was not compatible with existing labour protection systems, and they would be instead the best positioned to determine which kind of protection they could grant to workers (only – they would not call them “workers”, but “drivers”, “partners”, “taskers”, “riders”, etc.).’
UK Labour Law, 2nd March 2021
Source: uklabourlawblog.com
‘On 15 December 2020, the London South Employment Tribunal gave its judgment in a claim brought by a domestic worker, Ms Kamalammal P K Puthenveettil, challenging her exemption from payment of the national minimum wage on the basis of the “family worker” exemption. The Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) accepted the Claimant’s argument that this exemption, stemming from the “family worker” exemption, was unlawful and indirectly discriminatory on the basis of sex. This exemption has meant that some live-in domestic workers – part of an overwhelmingly female and largely ethnic minority and / or migrant workforce – have been at worst denied payment of the national minimum wage (‘NMW’), and in other cases lacked clarity about their entitlement to this very basic right. After outlining the background to Puthenveettil, this post will explain the family worker exemption and its (mis-)application to some live-in domestic workers. It will then analyse the judgment in Puthenveettil, its significance in questioning the devaluation of domestic work, and the limitations of the legal framework for domestic workers in the UK.’
UK Labour Law, 1st March 2021
Source: uklabourlawblog.com
‘In a landmark decision the Supreme Court has ruled that The Central London Employment Tribunal, and the Court of Appeal were correct to find that the Claimant Uber drivers were “workers”, rather than independent contractors. ‘Whether a contract is a ‘worker’s contract’ is a matter of statutory interpretation, not contractual interpretation. That involves taking a purposive approach which, in the employment context, is to protect those who are vulnerable as a result of their subordination to, and dependence upon, another person in relation to their work. In the case of Uber, the employment tribunal’s findings on the relative degree of control exercised by Uber and drivers respectively over the service provided to passengers justified its conclusion that the drivers were workers,’ according to the Supreme Court.’
Park Square Barristers, 24th February 2021
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘In a landmark judgment which will have wide-ranging implications for workers and employers in the gig economy, the Supreme Court has upheld an employment tribunal’s decision that Uber drivers were workers and therefore entitled to the minimum wage, statutory annual leave and protection from detriment under the Employment Rights Act 1996.’
Old Square Chambers, 19th February 2021
Source: oldsquare.co.uk
‘Uber has been accused of trying to deter drivers from seeking compensation for missed holiday and minimum wage payments after a landmark court ruling.’
The Guardian, 22nd February 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025