| Argentina |
Repartos Ya S.A. |
Repartos Ya S.A. / Deliverers |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021 |
Repartos Ya failed to disprove the presumption of employment. |
No ratings available |
| Argentina |
Rappi |
Rappi / Rojas Luis Roger Miguel y otros |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Platform ban |
2019 |
The judge finds that the denial of access to the platform for the riders and drivers petitioning multiple complaints regarding the working conditions is a violation of the right to freedom of association. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Australia |
Uber |
Uber / Australian Competition and Consumer Commission |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - misleading representation of fares and fees |
2022 |
An Australian court has fined Uber 14 million dollars for threatening cancellation fees it never charged and overstating fare estimates on some rides. |
No ratings available |
| Australia |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo / Mr Franco |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021 |
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) found that Mr Franco was an employee and was unfairly dismissed. |
No ratings available |
| Belgium |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
Deliveroo couriers should be classed as employees.
|
1
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Uber |
Tribunal Regional do Trabalho de São Paulo
|
Case dismissed |
Yes- Employee status |
2025 |
Uber was initially ordered to recognise the drivers' employment. The Labour Court dismissed the case. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
Tribunal Regional do Trabalho da 5ª Região
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Intermittent work |
2025 |
Court acknowledges intermittent employment relationship between courier and iFood. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
Tribunal Regional do Trabalho em São Paulo
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes- Employee status |
2024 |
The 14th Panel of the São Paulo Regional Labour Court (TRT2) ordered iFood to pay R$10 million in compensation and recognize its delivery workers.
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
5th Civil Court of Osasco/SP
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No -Deactivation |
2024 |
iFood has been ordered to reactivate the account of a driver who was wrongly banned and to pay compensation for moral damage.
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
Tribunal Regional do Trabalho da 5ª Região (TRT-5) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employment status |
2024 |
A motorcyclist who worked for four months on a fixed schedule and under constant supervision must be considered an employee.
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Uber |
Juizado do Maracanã |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Unfair deactivation |
2024 |
The Maracanã Court has ordered Uber to reactivate a driver's account and pay 5,000 reais in compensation.
|
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Uber |
12ª Vara Cível de São Paulo |
Ruled against workers |
No - Unfair deactivation |
2024 |
The 12th Civil Court of São Paulo rejected a driver's claim against Uber for unfair deactivation.
|
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
24ª vara Cível de Curitiba/PR |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Unfair deactivation |
2024 |
iFood was ordered to re-accredit and pay compensation to the driver who had been unjustly blocked.
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Uber, et al. |
Supremo Tribunal Federal |
In progress |
|
2024 |
The first ruling by the Federal Supreme Court on the possibility of standardising the relationship between platforms and workers is in favour of such a practice.
An emblematic case to be decided by the court would serve as a guide for all instances across the country.
|
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
0000531-27.2023.5.07.0013 |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
The 13th Labour Court of Fortaleza recognised the employment relationship between a rider and the company Ifood.
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
Tribunal Regional do Trabalho da 5ª Região (TRT-5) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employed status |
2023 |
The court recognized an iFood driver's employment with the platform, not the intermediary company. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
iFood |
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employed status |
2023 |
The 3rd Labor Court of Campo Grande in Mato Grosso recognized the employment relationship between iFood and one of its drivers
|
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Rappi |
Ministério Público do Trabalho / Rappi |
Ruled against workers |
Yes -Self-employed status |
2023 |
November 2023: The Federal Supreme overturned the October decision.
October 2023: A regional labor court sentenced Rappi to hire all the drivers who worked for the platform for at least six months between 2017 and May 2023.
|
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Brazil |
Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda |
Ministério Público Do Trabalho (MPT) / Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022 |
The relationship between Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda and its crowd workers is an employment relation. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Canada |
Uber |
Metro Taxi Ltd. et al. / City of Ottawa |
|
|
2024 |
The City of Ottawa had been negligent in enforcing the taxi bylaw, allowing Uber to operate and damaging the local taxi industry. |
|
| Canada |
Uber |
Uber Technologies Inc. v. Heller |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Arbitration agreement |
2020 |
The Supreme Court of Canada held that Uber’s arbitration agreement with its drivers was invalid — largely on the basis that it prescribed the Netherlands as the place of arbitration. |
No ratings available |
| Finland |
Wolt |
KHO (Supreme Administrative Court) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2025 |
Food couriers working for companies such as Wolt are employees. |
No ratings available
|
| Finland |
Wolt |
Wolt / Hämeenlinna Administrative Court |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2024 |
Wolt couriers are self-employed rather than employees. |
No ratings available
|
| France |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022 |
The Labor Court reclassified the service contract of four couriers as a contract of work. Deliveroo was ordered to pay 9.7 million euros of social security contributions. |
4
Fairwork Ratings
|
| France |
Uber |
Cour de cassation
Ruling n° 374 FP-P+B+R+I
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
The Cour de Cassation ruled that a former Uber driver should have been considered an employee instead of a self-employed partner.
|
4
Fairwork Ratings
|
| France |
Take Eat Easy |
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2018 |
The Cour de Cassation ruled that the Take Eat Easy riders were employees. |
No ratings available |
| Germany |
Lieferando |
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Working conditions |
2021 |
The Federal Court in Erfurt decided that Lieferando must provide couriers with work equipment. |
7
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Germany |
Crowdworkers |
Bundesarbeitsgericht / Crowdworkers |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
For the first time ever, the German Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) has recognised a crowdworker as having the legal status of an employee. |
Fairwork Ratings |
| India |
Urban Company |
Urban Company / Gurugram District Court |
The suit was withdrawn |
No - Right to strike |
2022 |
Urban Company filed a lawsuit in the Gurugram district court against its “partners” for protesting against the company’s alleged “unfair labour practices”. At first, the court restrained the protesters from holding demonstrations in front and the back gate of the plaintiff’s company office within the 100-meter area. Then, it found the company’s filings “devoid of merits”, and Urban Company withdrew the suit. |
5
Fairwork Ratings
|
| India |
Ola |
Uber / Delhi Commercial Driver Union |
The petition was withdrawn |
Yes - Employee status |
2017 |
The unions of Ola and Uber drivers claimed that the drivers are entitled to basic labour protection since they should be classified as workmen. However, the petition was withdrawn. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| India |
Uber |
Uber / Delhi Commercial Driver Union |
The petition was withdrawn |
Yes - Employee status |
2017
|
The unions of Ola and Uber drivers claimed that the drivers are entitled to basic labour protection since they should be classified as workmen. However, the petition was withdrawn. |
1
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Indonesia |
Blue Bird Group |
Arifin Adnan and Opik Taufik v PT Blue Bird Group |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2010
|
Taxi drivers lack an employment relationship with the company, as they are paid on commission rather than a fixed wage. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Foodinho (Glovo)
|
Foodinho (Glovo) / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - algorithms |
2023 |
Foodihno's selection system (Glovo) has been found to be discriminatory. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Uber Eats
Deliveroo
|
Uber Eats & Deliveroo / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The Labour Section of the Milan Court ordered Deliveroo and Uber Eats to pay their riders social security and pension contributions. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Uber Eats |
Uber Eats / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The dismissals of 4,000 Uber Eats riders are "illegitimate."
|
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Glovo |
Foodinho (Glovo) / NIdiL, Filt, Filcams, and CGIL |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
Foodhino (Glovo) must pay arrears to two riders starting in 2019. The entire shift in which the rider is logged into the platform is considered work time and has to be paid consequently. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Glovo |
Glovo / CGIL |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2023 |
The platform must explain how its algorithm works in the rides’ allocation. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo / Worker |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The Court of Appeal of Milan has decided in favour of the employee status of a Deliveroo rider. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Glovo |
Glovo / Workers |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022
|
Milan’s Labour Court ordered Glovo to reintegrate a rider that had been disconnected and to give him an employment contract. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Foodinho (Glovo) |
Francia Enrico / Foodinho (Glovo) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022
|
The Labour Section of the Turin Court recognised the rider Enrico Francia the application of the National Collective Agreement for Tertiary, Distribution, and Services as a consequence of his employment relationship with Foodinho (Glovo). |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Foodinho (Glovo) |
Tuttolomondo Marco/ Foodinho (Glovo) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020
|
An employment relationship exists between Foodinho and the rider making the recourse. |
No ratings available |
| Italy |
Foodora |
Foodora / Riders |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status (with benefits) |
2018
|
The Court recognized Foodora riders as independent contractors. In 2019, the Court of Appeal confirmed the ruling. Nonetheless, they should have some benefits: the labor law should classify their job as between salaried and independent work. Foodora appealed. In 2023, the Court of Cassation rejected the appeal. |
No ratings available |
| Kenya |
Uber |
Uber / Kanuri Limited & 34 others |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2021 |
In 2016, Uber claimed that the group of 34 drivers had not entered into contracts with them but had done so with Uber BV in Amsterdam. In 2021, the High Court of Kenya concluded that all disputes had to be settled locally.
In 2022, Uber has appealed to Kenya’s apex court. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Mexico |
Uber |
|
Ruled against workers |
No - Business authorisation
|
2023
|
Two judges in the Federal court in Quintana Roo ruled that Uber could legally operate in Cancun without the same licenses and permits that taxi drivers must have. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
ECLI:NL:HR:2025:319 |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Both depending on the circumstances |
2025
|
Whether an Uber driver is a true entrepreneur or an employee depends on the specific circumstances. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Temper B.V. |
Rechtbank Amsterdam (Amsterdam Court) ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:3987
|
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2024
|
The Amsterdam court ruled that Temper is not an employer since it does not pay wages; clients do. Workers set their own rates and can be replaced if they cannot complete a job. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING (FNV) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Collective agreement |
2023
|
The sectoral collective agreement and pension fund for logistics applies to the company's riders. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Ola Cabs |
OLA NETHERLANDS B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3]
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2023
|
Three drivers were denied access to their personal data. Ola Cabs was ordered to disclose meaningful information about the use in automated decision-making of worker earnings profiles and scores. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
UBER B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3] [appellant sub 4] [appellant sub 5] [appellant sub 6]
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2023
|
The court found that six drivers had been robo-fired by Uber without appeal. 'There was thus insufficient evidence of actual human intervention.” |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
UBER B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3] [appellant sub 4]
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2023
|
The court ordered that Uber must explain how driver personal data and profiling are used in Uber’s upfront, dynamic pay and pricing system.
On October 6, 2023, the District Court of Amsterdam ordered Uber to pay €584,000 in penalties for failure to comply with the court order for algorithmic transparency.
|
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee Status |
2023
|
The agreements between Deliveroo and its couriers qualify as employment contracts. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING |
|
|
2022
|
The decision of 13 September 2021 is suspended. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
Uber / Staat der Nederlanden |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2022
|
The decision to declare the Taxi Transport CBA generally binding was valid. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING (FNV) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2021
|
Deliveroo falls under the generally binding collective labour agreement for Professional Freight Transport. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Helpling |
HELPLING NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING and [appellante sub 2] |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021
|
The collective labour agreement for cleaning work is not applicable. A temporary employment agreement exists between the digital platform Helpling and its cleaners because the households structurally employ them. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
Uber B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021
|
The Taxi Transport Collective Labour Agreement (CAO Taxivervoer) covers Uber drivers. The legal relationship between Uber and these drivers meets all the characteristics of an employment contract. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Ola |
OLA NETHERLANDS B.V. / [verzoeker 1], [verzoeker 2], [verzoeker 3] |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Data access |
2021
|
Ola must provide access to drivers' personal data. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
UBER B.V. / [verzoeker 1], [verzoeker 2], [verzoeker 3], [verzoeker 4], [verzoeker 5], [verzoeker 6], [verzoeker 7], [verzoeker 8], [verzoeker 9], [verzoeker 10] |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Data access |
2021
|
Uber must provide access to drivers' personal data. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Uber |
UBER B.V. / [eiser 6]
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Unfair dismissals by the algorithm |
2021
|
The Amsterdam District Court has ordered Uber to reinstate five UK drivers and one Dutch driver and pay compensation after they were unlawfully dismissed by algorithmic means. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V. / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021
|
Deliveroo riders are not self-employed, but work for the company on the basis of an employment contract. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Stichting Bedrijfstakpensioenfonds voor het Beroepsvervoer over de weg |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Pension fund |
2019
|
Deliveroo is obliged to participate in the industry-wide pension fund for professional road transport. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Helpling |
Helpling Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2019
|
There is no employment relationship between Helpling and its cleaners. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - collective agreement |
2019 |
Deliveroo falls under the scope of the provisions of the Collective Labour Agreement for Professional Transport of Goods. |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
Deliveroo Netherlands B.V / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2019
|
The relationship between Deliveroo and its drivers still qualified as an employment contract |
No ratings available |
| Netherlands (the) |
Deliveroo |
DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / [eiser] |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2018
|
The Court of Amsterdam ruled that the agreement that a rider entered into with Deliveroo does not count as an employment contract. |
No ratings available |
| New Zealand |
E Tu Inc & Anor v Rasier Operations Bv & Ors |
E Tu Inc & Anor v Rasier Operations Bv & Ors |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022
|
Four drivers were found to be employees of Uber. |
No ratings available |
| New Zealand |
Rasier New Zealand Ltd & Uber BV |
Rasier New Zealand Ltd & Uber BV / Arachchige |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2020
|
The Employment Court ruled against the classification of the complainant as an employee of Uber. |
No ratings available |
| Nigeria |
Uber |
Cheick Ouedraogo v. Uber Technologies System Nigeria Ltd
& 2 Ors |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022
|
The court ordered Uber to pay damages to 'ex-employee' over workplace harassment, victimization, and wrongful termination of employment.
The Court also affirmed the principle of co-employer liability in employment relations.
|
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Nigeria |
Uber |
Oladapo Olatunji and Daniel John (Representing themselves and other Uber and Taxify Drivers) v. Uber Technologies System Nigeria Limited & Taxify Technology Nigeria Limited |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2018
|
The claimants argued that the drivers working for Uber are employees. The court dismissed the case as the claimants could not prove their case. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Philippines |
foodpanda |
foodpanda / Davao United Delivery Riders Association Inc. (DUDRAI) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2022
|
The National Labor Relations Commission stated that foodpanda illegally dismissed riders who were regular employees. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Philippines |
Grab |
Grab / Smith&Williamson, independent monitoring trustee |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2019
|
The Phillippine Competition Commission fined Grab. Notably, the fine could not be passed on to the riders or customers of the service. |
3
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Portugal |
Glovo |
Glovo /Rider |
No agreement reached |
Yes |
2023
|
Glovo did not reach an agreement with another courier demanding to be recognized as a dependent worker. |
No ratings available |
| Portugal |
Glovo |
Glovo /Rider |
No agreement reached |
Yes |
2023
|
A courier filed a lawsuit before the Labor Court of Port to claim the formalization of an employment contract. |
No ratings available |
| South Africa |
Uber |
Uber South Africa Technology Services (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW) and Others |
Ruled against workers |
|
2018
|
Drivers of Uber SA are not employees of Uber SA. Uber SA and Uber BV, established in the Netherlands, are separate legal entities. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Juzgado de lo Social número 4 de Donostia-San Sebastián |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2025 |
Between 2018 and 2020, Glovo had 168 riders as fake autonomy workers in Gipuzkoa. |
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Juzgado de lo Social número 32 de Madrid |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
Between 2015 and 2018, Glovo has had 3,312 riders as fake autonomy workers. |
0 Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Uber Eats |
Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña |
Ruled in favour of workers |
|
2024 |
A tribunal has ruled that an Uber Eats driver employed by a subcontractor was unfairly dismissed. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo / Juzgado de lo Social número 15 de València |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
Glovo has to pay one million euros in social security contributions for 610 delivery workers in Valencia. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Stuart |
Stuart / Juzgado de lo Social número 18 de Barcelona |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
Stuart has been ordered to pay 237,000 euros to the General Social Security Fund for the contributions of 108 delivery workers. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Glovo |
Amazon / Juzgado de lo Social número 42 de Madrid |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
Madrid's Social Court number 42 has condemned Amazon for hiring 3,688 delivery workers as false self-employed workers between October 2019 and November 2021. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Cabify |
Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunitat Valenciana |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
In Valencia, Cabify had illegally subcontracted with three companies. |
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo / Juzgado de lo Social número 4 de Madrid |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The Social Court number 4 of Madrid recognized an employment relationship between Glovo and 280 riders in Murcia and Cartagena. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Clintu Online S.L.com |
Clintu / Juzgado de lo social número 15 de Barcelona |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The Social Court, n.º15 of Barcelona, upheld the claim presented by the General Treasury of Social Security against the cleaning service platform Clintu Online S.L.com, recognizing 505 workers as employees. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Ride-hailing platforms |
Platforms / CJEU |
Ruled against companies |
No |
2023 |
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concludes that the limitation of one license for Transport Vehicles with a Driver (VTC) for every 30 taxis goes against the law of the European Union. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo / Inspección de Trabajo y Seguridad Social Madrid |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2023 |
The Labour and Social Security Inspectorate in Madrid proposed a penalty of €57 million on delivery company Glovo for false classification of self-employed workers and illegal employment of migrant workers. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo / Riders (Juzgado de lo Social nº 1 de Pamplona) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022 |
The Social Court of Pamplona declared that there was an employment relationship between 207 Glovo riders and the company itself from October 2018 to August 2019. Glovo appealed against the ruling, but in September 2023, the court rejected the appeal. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo App 23 / Riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2022 |
The Social Court number 3 of Córdoba recognized riders as employees, not self-employed workers. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Glovo |
Glovo / J.Parrado |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021 |
Glovo unjustifiably disconnected the rider's account without prior notice. The ruling condemned Glovo for unfair dismissal to compensate him with 3,349 euros. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Portier Eats Spain S.L |
Portier Eats Spain / FeSMC-UGT and CCOO
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2021 |
After the collective dismissal of more than 4,000 Uber delivery drivers, Portier Eats Spain must pay each affected rider 45 days' salary per year of service, with minimum compensation, depending on seniority and the remuneration received in the last year. |
2
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Deliveroo |
Juzgado de lo Social nº 24 de Barcelona |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021 |
The Barcelona Court ruled that Deliveroo riders should be considered employees rather than independent contractors. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Deliveroo |
Roofoods Spain S.L. / TRESORERIA GENERAL DE LA SEGURETAT SOCIAL |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
The Social Court No. 24 of Barcelona determined that 748 Deliveroo riders operated as false self-employed and recognized the employment relationship between the riders and the company. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Glovo |
TRIBUNAL SUPREMO (Recurso de casación para la unificación de doctrina) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
The High Court declared the existence of an employment relationship between Glovo and a delivery driver. |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| Spain |
Deliveroo |
ROOFOODS SPAIN SL (DELIVEROO) / FONS DE GARANTIA SALARIAL (FOGASA) |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2019 |
The court declared the existence of a violation of fundamental rights in the company's conduct to terminate a group of workers' contracts. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Deliveroo |
TESORERÍA GENERAL DE LA SEGURIDAD SOCIAL / ROODFOODS SPAIN S |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2019 |
The Valencia court ruled that Deliveroo wrongly hired 97 riders as self-employed contractors instead of regular workers. |
No ratings available |
| Spain |
Glovo |
Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Asturias |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2019
|
The High Court of Justice of Asturias rules on the employment nature of the contract signed between Glovo and one of its "riders". |
0
Fairwork Ratings
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
Bolt |
BANDI & OTHERS V BOLT OPERATIONS OÜ AND ANOTHER |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
|
Because of the company's control over their work, Bolt drivers are employees. |
0 Fairwork Raitings
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
Deliveroo |
IWGB / Central Arbitration Committee and another |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2023
|
The Supreme Court has ruled that Deliveroo riders do not have the right to collective negotiations on pay and conditions because they are ‘self-employed’. |
3
Fairwork Ratings
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
Uber |
UBER BRITANNIA LIMITED
v. SEFTON METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL
|
Ruled in favour of workers |
No |
2023 |
Uber sued Sefton Council in Merseyside over VAT terms for operators outside London. Currently, private hire operators do not pay VAT as the individual drivers are usually classed as independent, self-employed contractors. On July 28, the High Court confirmed that a passenger entered into a contract of hire with the minicab operator, not the driver. “A properly regulated and remunerated pool of drivers benefits public safety.
|
4
Fairwork Ratings
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
Uber |
Uber B.V and others vs Aslam and others |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2021
|
The UK Supreme Court has ruled that Uber drivers should be classed as workers with access to minimum wage and paid holidays. |
4
Fairwork Ratings
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
City Sprint |
City Sprint UK Ltd / London South Employment Tribunal |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Holiday pay |
2020
|
The cycle couriers were workers both before and after the new contract they had to sign in 2017 and therefore have a claim to holiday pay. |
No ratings available |
| United Kingdom (the) |
City Sprint |
City Sprint & Revisecatch / Dewhurst |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Transfer of undertakings |
2019 |
Gig economy workers are protected under TUPE (Transfer of Undertaking Protection of Employment) regulations. Under TUPE, 'employees' are entitled to maintain the same level of protection and rights that they had prior to the transfer in case of a transferring business/service contract to a new owner/contractor. |
No ratings available |
| United Kingdom (the) |
Addison Lee Limited |
Addison Lee Limited/ (1) MR M LANGE (2) MR M OLSZEWSKI
(3) MR M MORAHAN |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2018 |
Drivers are considered employees under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the National Minimum Wage 1998. |
No ratings available
|
| United Kingdom (the) |
Hermes |
Hermes / GMB |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2018 |
An employment tribunal found that a group of 65 Hermes couriers are workers, not self-employed. |
No ratings available
|
| United States (the) |
Uber, Lyft, DoorDash |
Castellanos v. State of California |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2024 |
The California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 22, enabling companies like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash to classify their drivers as independent contractors. |
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Amazon |
Amazon / Amazon drivers |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2024 |
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that Amazon Flex delivery drivers are employees. |
No ratings available
|
| United States (the) |
DoorDash, Grubhub, Uber |
Food delivery companies / riders |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Minimum pay |
2023 |
The judge, Nicholas Moyne, said New York City regulators could raise minimum wages for app-based food delivery workers.
|
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Uber |
Uber / Erik Adolph |
Ruled in favour of workers |
No - Right to sue |
2023 |
The California Supreme Court allowed workers to sue for labor law violations on the state’s behalf. |
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Ride-hailing and food delivery companies |
Ride-hailing and food delivery companies / The State of California |
Ruled against workers |
Yes - Self-employed status |
2023 |
A California appeal court reversed a lower-court ruling that found Proposition 22 to be illegal. |
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Uber |
Uber / The State of California |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
A California appeal court said Uber and Lyft must classify their drivers as employees. The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided not to hear an appeal from Uber and Lyft (2024). |
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Lyft |
Lyft / The State of California |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes - Employee status |
2020 |
A California appeal court said Uber and Lyft must classify their drivers as employees. |
0
US Ratings
|
| United States (the) |
Dynamex |
Dynamex / Charles Lee et al. |
Ruled in favour of workers |
Yes |
2018 |
California’s Supreme Court set a strict new standard that made it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors. |
0
US Ratings
|
| Uruguay |
Uber |
Tribunal de Apelaciones de Trabajo |
Ruled in favour of worker |
Yes |
2024 |
Uber has to recognise an employment relationship with one of its drivers, which was unprecedented in Uruguay. |
0
Uruguay Ratings
|
