Do employing entities have a responsibility to not misrepresent the employment status of their staff? This article suggests that recent jurisprudence does create this responsibility. The article starts, first, by discussing the much-awaited Taylor Review, released in July 2017. This purported to address the problems of employment rights and tax in the software driven ‘gig’ economy. Four main groups of Taylor’s recommendations were to relabel employment statuses and write more secondary legislation, reform tax, cut paid holidays, and introduce new ‘soft’ labour rights. These proposals do not address the real issues. Second, this article explains why a test for employment status highlighted by Taylor – ‘mutuality of obligation’ – has not formed part of binding UK Supreme Court jurisprudence since Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher. Third, it discusses what the Taylor Review did not: the problem of misrepresentation of employment status, which has become closely associated with the gig economy. In October 2017, the Supreme Court issued a pathbreaking judgment that changed the requirements for fraud cases, aligning the tests for civil and criminal fraud, and therefore making fraud claims easier. This is relevant because of the very serious finding, in Aslam v Uber BV [2017] IRLR 4, [96] by the Employment Tribunal that Uber provided an ‘excellent illustration...of “armies of lawyers” contriving documents in their clients’ interests which simply misrepresent the true rights and obligations on both sides.’ This raises the question of whether ‘contriving’ to ‘misrepresent’ something enables fraud claims, either by staff who seek employment rights, or by public authorities for tax receipts or social security contributions.

中文翻译：

---

优步、泰勒评论、互惠和不歪曲就业状况的义务

用人单位是否有责任不歪曲其员工的就业状况？这篇文章表明，最近的判例确实产生了这种责任。本文首先讨论了 2017 年 7 月发布的期待已久的 Taylor Review。该评论旨在解决软件驱动的“零工”经济中的就业权利和税收问题。泰勒的四个主要建议是重新定义就业状况并制定更多的二级立法、改革税收、减少带薪假期和引入新的“软”劳工权利。这些建议没有解决真正的问题。其次，本文解释了为什么自 Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher 以来，泰勒强调的就业状况测试——“义务的相互性”——并未成为具有约束力的英国最高法院判例的一部分。第三，它讨论了《泰勒评论》没有提到的问题：误报就业状况的问题，这与零工经济密切相关。2017 年 10 月，最高法院作出开创性判决，改变了欺诈案件的要求，统一了民事和刑事欺诈的测试，从而使欺诈索赔变得更加容易。这是相关的，因为在就业法庭的 Aslam v Uber BV [2017] IRLR 4, [96] 中，Uber 提供了一个“极好的例证......“律师大军”在其客户中编造文件的非常严重的发现利益只是歪曲了双方的真实权利和义务。这就提出了一个问题，即“故意”“歪曲”某事是否会导致寻求就业权利的员工、