The Supreme Court has confirmed the drivers who brought proceedings against Uber are workers.

This landmark judgment means that Uber drivers on terms similar to those of the claimants in this case are entitled to basic rights including holiday pay, rest breaks and the national minimum wage whilst they are in their licenced territory and logged into the Uber app. This is true even if they are waiting for a job.

The Supreme Court agreed that, despite complicated contractual documents stating the drivers were in business for themselves, the degree of subordination and control the drivers were under meant that, in practice, they were working for Uber.

The consequences of this decision are potentially far reaching. This case now goes back to the Employment Tribunal to determine whether the claimants are owed unpaid wages and holiday pay.

For Uber, the questions will be how many other drivers will take action against them and what the overall financial cost will be. Thousands of linked cases may now be difficult to defend. There is also the potential for significant liabilities around unpaid pension contributions and tax.

Other gig economy employers should now review their own terms and conditions. Do they reflect the reality of the situation? If there is a risk that some staff may be workers, are there any potential liabilities? How should the workforce be structured going forward?

The Uber case illustrates the importance of analysing the reality of people’s working experiences rather than just the contracts which overlay them. All employers should take this opportunity to review the status of any atypical workers they employ.