Jhuti v royal mail
It seems like you're asking about Jhuti v Royal Mail.
Jhuti v Royal Mail is a significant employment law case in the UK, decided by the Court of Appeal in 2020. The case revolves around the concept of "worker" status under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
In this case, Ms. Jhuti was a self-employed courier working for Royal Mail. She claimed that she was a worker, not self-employed, and therefore entitled to various employment rights, including protection from unfair dismissal. Royal Mail argued that she was self-employed and not a worker.
The Court of Appeal ultimately ruled in favor of Ms. Jhuti, finding that she was a worker and not self-employed. The court held that the key factors in determining worker status are:
- Control: The employer has a significant degree of control over the worker's activities.
- Obligation to perform work: The worker is obliged to perform work for the employer, and the employer has the right to specify the work to be done.
- Mutuality of obligation: The worker is entitled to receive payment for the work done, and the employer is obliged to pay for the work done.
The court found that Royal Mail had a significant degree of control over Ms. Jhuti's activities, including the routes she took, the times she worked, and the packages she delivered. Additionally, Ms. Jhuti was obliged to perform work for Royal Mail, and the company had the right to specify the work to be done. Finally, the court found that there was a mutuality of obligation between Ms. Jhuti and Royal Mail, as she was entitled to receive payment for her work, and Royal Mail was obliged to pay her for the work done.
This case has significant implications for the gig economy and the classification of workers. It highlights the importance of considering the level of control, obligation, and mutuality of obligation when determining worker status.
Would you like me to elaborate on any specific aspects of this case or its implications?