26th November 2024
Bolt Drivers Win Worker Status In Landmark Ruling
An Employment Tribunal has ruled that Bolt drivers are legally classified as ‘workers’. The ruling means that 15,000 drivers could be eligible for compensation of up to £200 million and more than 100,000 drivers now have a right to minimum wage, holiday and whistleblowing protection.
Bolt, an Estonian ride-hailing app which engages over 100,000 drivers across the UK, argued that the drivers were classed as self-employed, and they engaged with the Company as independent Contractors. Their case was that under their Agency Model, they acted as an Agent for drivers, who entered into separate contracts with their passengers, or that they operated as a customers of the drivers. Bolt then made the case that under their newer Principal Model, they did not engage with drivers personally and argued again that they operated as a customer of the drivers.
However, the Employment Tribunal found that this was inconsistent with reality, ruling instead that the drivers should instead be classified as ‘Workers’. The Tribunal ruled that “there is nothing in the relationship which demands, or even suggests, agency”, arguing that the above Contract “is a fiction designed by Bolt”.
The Tribunal’s ruling on worker-status was based on the findings that Bolt drivers worked under contract and that they could not provide a substitute to do their work. This follows the landmark ruling in 2021 which found that Uber, one of Bolt’s competitors, engaged with Drivers as workers and not as self-employed contractors.
By awarding the drivers worker-status, the Tribunal awarded the Bolt drivers the right to minimum wage, statutory holiday, statutory rest breaks, protection from unlawful discrimination, protection from whistleblowing detriment and potentially the right to parental pay.
The ruling is an important one for any employer who engages with individuals on a self-employed basis. It should serve as a reminder that a Tribunal will assess the practical realities of a working relationship, as opposed to what is written in a Contract. Importantly, even if an individual is engaged in providing work for multiple operators, they can still be classed as a worker. In this case, even though many of the Bolt drivers worked for different operators, they were still classed as workers. The Tribunal was more interested in the arrangement during the periods that they were working for Bolt than in the fact that they worked for multiple platforms. As such, any employer who engages individuals as ‘self-employed’, but operates with a degree of ‘control’ over these individuals should very carefully consider the working relationship. If an employer incorrectly class these individuals as self-employed, when in reality they are workers or employees, they could be liable to a substantial Employment Tribunal claim.
