view
Abstract: The recent decision of the UK Supreme Court in Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee marks a retrogressive step in the protection of fundamental employment rights in the United Kingdom. In that case, the Court found that Deliveroo Riders were nei- ther “workers” for the purpose of domestic employment law, nor were they in an “employment relationship” for the purposes of accessing trade union rights within the context of art.11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The consequence of this decision is to further exclude vulnerable gig economy workers—who are already engaged in precarious app or platform-based work— from the basic or core protections offered not only by domestic legislation, but also by international fundamental (social) rights. This article argues that, in so doing, the Supreme Court failed adequately to engage with the underlying pro- tective purpose of the statutory regime as already recognised in its pre-existing case law, while also underestimating the normative value of the right to bargain collectively, as well as individual labour rights, as fundamental social rights.
Keywords: Collective bargaining, trade union rights, fundamental social rights, the gig economy, employment status, the worker
JICL welcomes full length articles (generally not exceeding 13,000 words inclusive of footnotes), shorter contributions in the form of notes and comments (generally not exceeding 8,000 words inclusive of footnotes) and book review articles of not more than 6,000 words.
We accept contributions for consideration on an exclusive submission basis. When submitting an article please certify that it is an unpublished article (that is, it has not been previously published in substantially similar form or with substantially similar content) and that it is not under consideration by any other journal.
To facilitate anonymous review, please give the names of authors and their short biographical information and acknowledgments in a separate page.
Authors retain copyright in the words used, but upon submission of material for publication, grant Sweet & Maxwell a licence to publish the submission in print and/or digital formats. Sweet & Maxwell retains copyright in the design, format and layout of all material published in JICL.
Once submissions are published, authors are entitled to one copy of the issue, 10 offprint copies and a PDF version of the submission.
Authors who send articles published in JICL to other publishers or media must include a reference to the publication of the article by JICL and Sweet & Maxwell.
Contributions and book reviews should be submitted in Microsoft Word format by way of email attachment to Professor Anton Cooray at Anton.cooray.1@city.ac.uk.
Authors should follow the OSCOLA citation system (http://www.law.ox.ac.uk/publications/oscola.php), except that we prefer authors to use indenting sparingly.
JICL uses the following heading levels: Main headings are in bold and preceded by a Roman numeral; second-level headings are in bold and italics and preceded by an uppercase alphabet; third-level headings are preceded by an Arabic numeral; and fourth-level headings are in italics and preceded by a lowercase alphabet.