A dispute in New York could have far-reaching implications for how Uber treats its on-demand workforce — namely, whether the company is legally responsible for people injured on the job.

If the case being heard by the New York state Workers’ Compensation board goes against Uber, and classifies the worker as an Uber employee, the company could be on the hook for years' worth of compensation claims. Since its founding, Uber has insisted that the drivers and couriers that work through its app are independent contractors, and it simply runs a software platform that connects them with customers. But efforts are underway nationwide to challenge that assertion, with test cases being filed to state and federal authorities.

The case in New York has been filed by Jorge Washington, a courier for Uber's Rush and Eats delivery services and a founding member of the New York Messengers Alliance, a group representing gig-economy delivery people pushing for better pay and conditions. The organization is backed by the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, which successfully successfully organized drivers in the city to receive more labor protections and benefits.

"Ordinarily, this would be a garden variety workers' compensation case," said Robert Grey, the attorney representing Washington, who has worked with the NYTWA in the past. "But Uber is very motivated to avoid a second hearing because the compensation board will decide on his employment status."

In an attempt to end the case before it reaches a second hearing, slated for late February, Uber offered to settle with Washington, floating the possibility of a cash payment on the condition that he accept a rejection of his claim and terminate his contract with Uber. Such a settlement would avoid setting precedent, and leave his independent contractor status untested.

Washington and Grey declined, and say they have no plans to accept a settlement of any dollar amount. Grey also believes Uber engaged in unfair retaliation against his client, based on its proposal for termination as part of a settlement deal.

An Uber spokesperson said the company rejects the allegation that it is retaliating against Washington — partly on the grounds that, because Washington is an independent contractor, rather than an employee, he is not covered by state labor laws that prohibit retaliation by employers against staff. That Washington is not an employee is, of course, the very point that remains up in the air, and which the state board will decide next month.

The company also insists it merely floated the possibility of a settlement, and made no formal offer.

"This claim — instigated by a taxi medallion-backed organization chasing headlines — is without merit on its face," the Uber spokesperson told BuzzFeed News in an email. "It fundamentally misunderstands how Uber works and ignores the fact that under the National Labor Relations Act, Mr. Washington can't engage in union activity."

Should the board rule Uber's messengers are independent contractors, they would not be entitled to the organizing protections and workers' compensation coverage enshrined in labor law. (The reference to 'medallion-backed' is to taxi-cab driver and medallion-owner Victor Salazar, who is married to the NYTWA executive director Bhairavi Desai and a paid staffer at the organization.)

