PedidosYa recently sent a message titled "Information of Your Interest" to its delivery workers in Uruguay, featuring a siren icon. The text does not inform about increases, improvements in conditions, or rights. It invites them to subscribe to an agreement to "ratify" that they choose the self-employed model according to the Digital Platform Workers Law No. 20.396.
The timing is not innocent. The company is facing a series of labor lawsuits from delivery workers who worked for years on the platform and claim that there was a dependent relationship. In these lawsuits, they are seeking items that they never received: Christmas bonus, leave, vacation pay, overtime, and, in several cases, severance. Since these claims cover several years, many exceed a million pesos. There are already first-instance rulings in opposing directions: some recognized subordination (including one that ordered payment of nearly $1.88 million plus future penalties) while others rejected it. The issue remains open in appeals. The principle of the primacy of reality (and ILO Recommendation 198) requires looking at the facts and not just the paper that people signed.
The List of Lawyers
The message states that if the delivery worker decides to sign, "they should seek advice from a lawyer." Immediately following is a list of professionals with their cell numbers, presented as "independent advisors not affiliated with PedidosYa." The company clarifies that these lawyers "expressed their willingness" for their contacts to be shared.
Here lies the underlying problem. A company that has an open conflict with part of its workers is the one that chooses, disseminates, and recommends the lawyers who should advise them on that same conflict. The delivery worker is referred to them by the opposing party, with a clear objective from the company: to confirm in writing that they were never employees and to reduce the risk of million-dollar claims.










