Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning and Infrastructure

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport

Close

The High Court has dismissed the challenge by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB) to its failed application for statutory recognition in respect of a group of Deliveroo’s riders (R (on the application of the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain) v Central Arbitration Committee).

Unions may apply to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) for statutory recognition to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of workers in a particular bargaining unit in relation to pay, hours and holidays.

A union must be able to show that it has the support of a majority of workers in the bargaining unit. The IWGB had applied to the CAC for statutory recognition in respect of a group of Deliveroo’s food delivery riders based in Camden and Kentish Town. Although the Union met the other criteria for recognition, its application failed because the CAC decided that the riders were self-employed, not workers, since their contracts contained a genuine right to use a substitute to make deliveries.

The IWGB challenged this decision by means of judicial review in the High Court, claiming that the right to bargain collectively is a fundamental right under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The High Court has now rejected this challenge on the basis that Article 11 only applies to individuals in an employment relationship, and not to individuals whose contracts do not satisfy the requirement of personal service. Since the CAC had found that the Deliveroo riders had a contractual right to use a substitute, Article 11 did not apply to them. The High Court also held that even if Article 11 had been engaged, it was fair and proportionate to limit the right to statutory recognition for collective bargaining to individuals in an employment relationship. The interference with the riders’ rights was limited as they could still join a union or enter into voluntary bargaining arrangements.

Given the variety of business models used in the gig economy, this case does not necessarily have wider implications, but it does reinforce Deliveroo’s argument that its delivery riders are genuinely self-employed, rather than workers. The IWGB has indicated that it will appeal the High Court’s decision in the Court of Appeal.

Latest articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
20 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JD

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning and Infrastructure chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Transport chevron