Over the last few years there has been considerable blurring of the lines between different types of employment status, and the definition of 'employee' and 'worker' differs slightly from one area of legislation to another. The growth of the ‘gig economy’ – made up of short-term contracts and flexible working as opposed to long-term contracts – has only added to the confusion. Employment Tribunals sometimes agree that workers are employees, and therefore entitled to benefits, and vice versa.

The Association of Independent Professionals and the Self-Employed (IPSE) has said the latest development in the Addison Lee worker rights case is another sign after the Uber judgement that “government must urgently step in on the confusion in the gig economy”.

IPSE commented after the Court of Appeal found that Addison Lee drivers are in fact workers and entitled to holiday pay and the national minimum wage. Addison Lee had appealed against the judgment of a 2017 Employment Tribunal case that first found their drivers were workers.

The Court of Appeal decision was made in light of the recent Supreme Court judgment stating that Uber drivers are entitled to receive the National Minimum Wage and holiday pay. Addison Lee’s appeal to the Court of Appeal had been put on hold in anticipation of the Supreme Court judgment.

Derek Cribb, CEO of IPSE, said:

“The Addison Lee judgment is yet another sign after the Uber case that the government must urgently step in on the confusion in the gig economy. The gig economy is a tangled mix not only of people who should truly be categorised as workers, but also a very large number of legitimately self-employed people who rely on the flexibility that freelancing offers.

“Both to restore the rights of exploited workers and also to secure freedom and flexibility for legitimately self-employed people, we urge the government to write into law a clear definition of self-employment. This is the true source of the confusion in the gig economy: that while there is a definition of employee and worker status in UK law, there is still no clear definition of who exactly is self-employed. We cannot continue in a situation where the only way to define self-employment is through court case after court case.”