"It is a very puzzling judgment," Professor Stewart said. A majority of the commission held that Uber set standards for its drivers' professionalism, determined their pay with no room for negotiation, managed all invoicing, and controlled the relationship between drivers and restaurants. Justice Ross, the Fair Work President, said an Uber company had "engaged Ms Gupta to perform delivery services for it, and paid her for them, as part of a business by which it delivered restaurant meals to the general public". But the Commission ultimately concluded Uber drivers were not employees because they lacked some of the "essential hallmarks of an employment relationship". Uber drivers can log on and off at will, work for other food delivery platforms at the same time as Uber and are under no obligation to wear a uniform or display an Uber Eats logo, so they do not appear to be exclusively Uber employees.

Uber welcomed the decision, saying it would allow the company to continue giving its drivers "freedom and flexibility". Loading TWU National Secretary Michael Kaine said the union is considering appealing the ruling. He said while the judgment rejected Mrs Gupta's case, it also provided a step forward in establishing rights for Uber workers. "It states what is already clear to those who work in Uber and those who use its service: that Uber is a transport service that has responsibilities to its workers, restaurants and the public who use its app," he said. Mrs Gupta's husband Santosh, speaking on her behalf, said the decision was very disappointing "not just because we lost, but because other people who are working hard for Uber Eats have also lost".

"The Australian government has to look at making some regulations to help those people otherwise people are going to be in poverty. If someone relies on Uber Eats for their livelihood, they can be making only about $100 a day." Professor Stewart said the outcome of the Fair Work case was not surprising, "but it is not what I would have expected given how much of Uber Eats' case was not just rejected but demolished by the majority of the bench". "It's certainly a major blow to anyone trying to argue that these riders or drivers are employees. It is a major victory not just for Uber but other platforms like Deliveroo that have a similar model," he said. "If you can't persuade the Fair Work Commission that this is an employment relationship even though the majority of the Full Bench has rejected key elements of the business model, then I don't think there would be too many platform workers taking a case to the Fair Work Commission with any confidence after this decision." In some jurisdictions overseas, workers on platforms like Uber have been given more protections. In the UK, those classified as "workers" are given a status in between employees and contractors.