{"id":468,"date":"2024-06-03T12:40:03","date_gmt":"2024-06-03T12:40:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/?p=468"},"modified":"2024-08-15T20:32:49","modified_gmt":"2024-08-15T20:32:49","slug":"en-puerto-rico-se-rechaza-reclamo-laboral-contra-uber-afirmando-la-inexistencia-de-contrato-de-trabajo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/en-puerto-rico-se-rechaza-reclamo-laboral-contra-uber-afirmando-la-inexistencia-de-contrato-de-trabajo\/","title":{"rendered":"In Puerto Rico, The Employment Claim Against Uber Is Rejected, Affirming That An Employment Contract Does Not Exist"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On the 8th of May, 2019, in the case \u201c<strong><em>Mercedes Ramos de Avil\u00e9s vs. Uber CT Corporation System<\/em><\/strong>\u201d, (Caso: 18-26-14056), the State Insurance Fund Corporation determined that the claim filed by a user against the Uber app did not fall under the Workers\u2019 Accident Compensation System Law. This was based on the fact that: (i) the agreement binding the parties indicates that Uber provides services to independent transport service providers; (ii) the company does not control the driver with regards to the provision of services; (iii) the driver decides when, how and for how long they use the app; (iv) the driver retains the option to accept, decline or ignore a user\u2019s transport request through the app; (v) the driver can use other service platforms; (vi) the driver is independent from the Electronic Ride-Hailing Platform. The Court concluded that the user is not an employee of Uber but an independent contractor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:60px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/19-Mercedes-Ramos-Aviles-v-UBER.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of (19) Mercedes Ramos Avile\u0301s v UBER.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-d3f46295-d59f-4fbb-aa4b-7f541a4b311f\" href=\"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/19-Mercedes-Ramos-Aviles-v-UBER.pdf\">(19) Mercedes Ramos Avile\u0301s v UBER<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/19-Mercedes-Ramos-Aviles-v-UBER.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-d3f46295-d59f-4fbb-aa4b-7f541a4b311f\">Descarga<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:60px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-media-text is-vertically-aligned-center has-background\" style=\"background-color:#f9f9f9;grid-template-columns:15% auto\"><figure class=\"wp-block-media-text__media\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"683\" src=\"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/uber-18-1024x683.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1154 size-full\" srcset=\"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/uber-18-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/uber-18-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/uber-18-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/uber-18.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure><div class=\"wp-block-media-text__content\">\n<p class=\"has-small-font-size\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.freepik.es\/vector-gratis\/firma-documentos-acuerdo-asociacion-consulta-comercial-acuerdo-trabajo-cliente-asistente-escribiendo-personajes-dibujos-animados-contrato-ilustracion-metafora-concepto-aislado-vector_12083340.htm#query=contraista&amp;position=22&amp;from_view=search&amp;track=ais\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">&#8211; Cr\u00e9ditos de imagen utilizada<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>En la causa \u201cMercedes Ramos de Avil\u00e9s vs. Uber CT Corporation System\u201d, (Caso: 18-26-14056), del 05\/04\/2018, la Corporaci\u00f3n del Fondo Del Seguro del Estado, determin\u00f3 que el reclamo presentado por una usuaria contra la aplicaci\u00f3n de Uber no encuadra bajo [&hellip;]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[30,5,19,23,21],"tags":[106,101,84],"class_list":["post-468","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-derecho-a-trabajar","category-jurisprudencia","category-jurisprudencia-laboral-internacional","category-legalidad","category-temas","tag-derecho-a-trabajar","tag-inexistencia-de-relacion-laboral","tag-legalidad"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/468","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=468"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/468\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3361,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/468\/revisions\/3361"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=468"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=468"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ubereslegal.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=468"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}