The Fair Work Commission has found that in spite of having limited control over the driver and the driver being unable to sub-contract work, there was no work-wage bargain between the applicant and Uber, no employment relationship and therefore no jurisdiction to hear an unfair dismissal application.
The applicant claimed that because he performed work as a servant of Uber and Uber exerted control over him via the “partner” app, he could be regarded as the equivalent of a casual employment.
Commissioner Michelle Bissett rejected the claim that an employment relationship existed on the basis that there were no consequences if a driver refused a request to work, that Uber did not require workers to drive exclusively for the company, did not provide the tools of trade to carry out the work, did not provide drivers with paid leave and did not pay them a “periodic wage”.
The applicant’s unfair dismissal claim was rejected.
This follows a lengthy Fair Work Ombudsman investigation that also found no employment relationship existed between Uber and its drivers, and the Pallage and Kaseris cases which also found Uber drivers were independent contractors rather than employees.