Johnson GT Gettaxi (UK) Ltd [2024] EAT 162:
In a recent decision, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that a black cab driver using the Gettaxi mobile application platform is not classified as a "worker" under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA). This decision reflects the unique legal and regulatory framework for black cab drivers in London, which significantly differs from that of private hire drivers in other ride-hailing platforms.
Gettaxi, the respondent, operates a platform allowing passengers to order black cabs through a mobile application, bypassing the need to hail one on the street. Qualified black cab drivers can sign up on Gettaxi’s app, though they are free to use other similar platforms simultaneously.
These drivers, bound by Hackney Carriage Regulations, are also required to charge no more than the regulated metered fare, cannot refuse passengers within a 12-mile radius or an hour’s journey, and must have passed "The Knowledge," a rigorous test of London’s streets and landmarks.
The claimant, a black cab driver licensed since 2014, used Gettaxi’s app from 2015 to 2017 and sought to rejoin in 2020. However, Gettaxi declined his application, leading the claimant to argue that the rejection was due to protected disclosures he had made previously. In its deliberations, the Employment Tribunal examined the legal definition of "worker" under Section 230 of the ERA, referred to the legal principles and compared this case to similar precedents, including Uber BV & Ors v Aslam and Autoclenz Limited v Belcher & Ors.
Crucially, the Tribunal cited Johnson v Transopco UK Limited, in which it was determined that black cab drivers using an app to accept fares are still regarded as independent operators of their taxis, distinguishing their case from that of Uber drivers. While Uber drivers are tightly integrated into Uber’s business model, black cab drivers are a business of their own merely using platforms like Gettaxi as an optional addition to their primary business of plying for hire.
In the current case with Gettaxi, the EAT found the Employment Tribunal did not err in law in holding that a driver using a black cab app was not a worker for the respondent. Where a tribunal finds that the claimant carries on a profession or business undertaking, whether the work done for the respondent is done in the course of such profession or business, or is a distinct activity, is a matter of fact and impression for the tribunal to determine based on all relevant facts and circumstances. The regulatory regime for black cabs is materially different from that considered in Uber, as black cab drivers have specific obligations under the licensing regime.
This ruling underscores the complexity of employment classifications within app-based services and speaks to the more independent status of black cab drivers in the regulated taxi sector, even when utilising digital platforms to connect with customers.
