London Daily

Focus on the big picture.
Friday, Jan 23, 2026

Uber accused of trying to deter drivers from seeking compensation

Uber accused of trying to deter drivers from seeking compensation

Lawyers acting for claimants say firm’s statement after last week’s supreme court ruling is misleading
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 taxi-hailing app may have to pay out more than £100m to more than 10,000 drivers involved in cases linked to a UK supreme court ruling on Friday that they must be classified as workers. Uber has previously argued that its 60,000 UK drivers are self-employed independent contractors with no right to holiday pay, a company pension or the national minimum wage.

The case began when two drivers, James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, took Uber to court on behalf of a group of about 23 others.

In a message to drivers after the ruling, Uber’s general manager for northern and eastern Europe, Jamie Heywood, said that as a result of the court’s decision “a small number of drivers from 2016 can be classified as workers, but this judgment does not apply to drivers who earn on the app today.”

He said Uber had made significant changes to its business in recent years, including giving drivers more control over their earnings and bringing in new protections including free insurance in case of sickness or injury.

One driver who received the message said: “After hearing about the court decision I was feeling slightly elated and thought at last things may change, but when I received the message from Uber it felt like a kick in the teeth saying it only applies to a few drivers.”

Lawyers acting for the claimants argue that Heywood’s statement was misleading.

Nigel Mackay, a partner at the law firm Leigh Day, which is acting for more than 2,200 drivers, said: “There is no way they can say ‘this doesn’t apply’ with confidence. To suggest that the changes they talk about have any impact on the supreme court findings, the effect of that is very misleading. Uber is trying to deter people from the claim with this message.”

The firm believes the drivers are due about £12,000 in compensation each, which would cost Uber more than £26m.

If Uber does not accept that the court’s ruling on Farrar and Aslam applies to all of its drivers, the linked cases will restart at the employment tribunal after being paused while the supreme court’s decision was awaited. Lawyers said hundreds more drivers had applied to join the claims since the ruling.

Mackay said the judgment was clear about specific factors which indicated Uber’s control of the drivers by, for example, setting the cost of a journey and handing out penalties related to users’ ratings. He said it was difficult to see that any of the changes to conditions Uber had talked about had changed that level of control.

Andrew Nugent Smith, the managing director of the law firm Keller Lenkner, which is representing more than 8,000 drivers, was contacted by about 1,000 more over the weekend. It believes those already on its books could claim an average of £10,000 each in compensation, which would cost Uber about £80m.

“To suggest that there is no impact at all on the wider driver community, and current conditions and working practices, is misleading,” he said. While the supreme court decision “did relate to historic terms and practices, that Uber has since changed, we are confident that drivers must still be treated as workers”.

An Uber source denied the claim that Heywood’s message had misled drivers or was intended to deter them from seeking compensation. The source said the company was consulting about changes it could make to its working practices. It is expected to announce a response to the consultation within weeks and wants the government to consider how to ensure there is a level playing field with a response to the ruling across the whole ride-hailing industry.
Newsletter

Related Articles

0:00
0:00
Close
Trump Reverses Course and Criticises UK-Mauritius Chagos Islands Agreement
Elizabeth Hurley Tells UK Court of ‘Brutal’ Invasion of Privacy in Phone Hacking Case
UK Bond Yields Climb as Report Fuels Speculation Over Andy Burnham’s Return to Parliament
America’s Venezuela Oil Grip Meets China’s Demand: Market Power, Legal Shockwaves, and the New Rules of Energy Leverage
TikTok’s U.S. Escape Plan: National Security Firewall or Political Theater With a Price Tag?
Trump’s Board of Peace: Breakthrough Diplomacy or a Hostile Takeover of Global Order?
Trump’s Board of Peace: Breakthrough Diplomacy or a Hostile Takeover of Global Order?
The Greenland Gambit: Economic Genius or Political Farce?
The Greenland Gambit: Economic Genius or Political Farce?
The Greenland Gambit: Economic Genius or Political Farce?
Will AI Finally Make Blue-Collar Workers Rich—or Is This Just Elite Tech Spin?
Prince William to Make Official Visit to Saudi Arabia in February
Prince Harry Breaks Down in London Court, Says UK Tabloids Have Made Meghan Markle’s Life ‘Absolute Misery’
Malin + Goetz UK Business Enters Administration, All Stores Close
EU and UK Reject Trump’s Greenland-Linked Tariff Threats and Pledge Unified Response
UK Deepfake Crackdown Puts Intense Pressure on Musk’s Grok AI After Surge in Non-Consensual Explicit Images
Prince Harry Becomes Emotional in London Court, Invokes Memory of Princess Diana in Testimony Against UK Tabloids
UK Inflation Rises Unexpectedly but Interest Rate Cuts Still Seen as Likely
AI vs Work: The Battle Over Who Controls the Future of Labor
Buying an Ally’s Territory: Strategic Genius or Geopolitical Breakdown?
AI Everywhere: Power, Money, War, and the Race to Control the Future
Trump vs the World Order: Disruption Genius or Global Arsonist?
Trump vs the World Order: Disruption Genius or Global Arsonist?
Trump vs the World Order: Disruption Genius or Global Arsonist?
Trump vs the World Order: Disruption Genius or Global Arsonist?
Arctic Power Grab: Security Chessboard or Climate Crime Scene?
Starmer Steps Back from Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ Amid Strained US–UK Relations
Prince Harry’s Lawyer Tells UK Court Daily Mail Was Complicit in Unlawful Privacy Invasions
UK Government Approves China’s ‘Mega Embassy’ in London Amid Debate Over Security and Diplomacy
Trump Cites UK’s Chagos Islands Sovereignty Shift as Justification for Pursuing Greenland Acquisition
UK Government Weighs Australia-Style Social Media Ban for Under-Sixteens Amid Rising Concern Over Online Harm
Trump Aides Say U.S. Has Discussed Offering Asylum to British Jews Amid Growing Antisemitism Concerns
UK Seeks Diplomatic De-escalation with Trump Over Greenland Tariff Threat
Prince Harry Returns to London as High Court Trial Begins Over Alleged Illegal Tabloid Snooping
High-Speed Train Collision in Southern Spain Kills at Least Twenty-One and Injures Scores
Meghan Markle May Return to the U.K. This Summer as Security Review Advances
Trump’s Greenland Tariff Threat Sparks EU Response and Risks Deep Transatlantic Rift
Prince Harry’s High Court Battle With Daily Mail Publisher Begins in London
Trump’s Tariff Escalation Presents Complex Challenges for the UK Economy
UK Prime Minister Starmer Rebukes Trump’s Greenland Tariff Strategy as Transatlantic Tensions Rise
Prince Harry’s Last Press Case in UK Court Signals Potential Turning Point in Media and Royal Relations
OpenAI to Begin Advertising in ChatGPT in Strategic Shift to New Revenue Model
GDP Growth Remains the Most Telling Barometer of Britain’s Economic Health
Prince William and Kate Middleton Stay Away as Prince Harry Visits London Amid Lingering Rift
Britain Braces for Colder Weather and Snow Risk as Temperatures Set to Plunge
Mass Protests Erupt as UK Nears Decision on China’s ‘Mega Embassy’ in London
Prince Harry to Return to UK to Testify in High-Profile Media Trial Against Associated Newspapers
Keir Starmer Rejects Trump’s Greenland Tariff Threat as ‘Completely Wrong’
Trump to hit Europe with 10% tariffs until Greenland deal is agreed
Prince Harry Returns to UK High Court as Final Privacy Trial Against Daily Mail Publisher Begins
×