Talk:Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 6 December 2017 by reviewer Kvng (talk · contribs).

Organized Labour

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Socialism

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

User:ADCUnion's 2020-08-07 edit war

As of 13:10, has reverted all reference to Farrah and Aslam's case against Uber as being backed by the IWGB, with the (paraphrased) edit summary IWGB has not and does not represent Farrar and Aslam. OK. Some sources, however, state precisely the opposite:

CNBC: "The labor union representing drivers Farrar and Aslam, the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB)..."
Boston Corporate: "The firm faced off in court with the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), a labor union representing drivers Farrar and Aslam..."
Institute of Employment Rights: "The Uber drivers in question, Yaseen Aslam and James Farrer, who were backed at the appeal case by their union the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB)..."
Independent: "The Independent Workers of Great Britain (IWGB) is representing appellants in the Deliveroo and Uber cases..."
ITV: "...the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents Mr Aslam and Mr Farrar."
I'll be adding these sources to the article shortly. But, ADCUnion the, err, ADC Union clearly did not. If you mean that the involved section of the IWGB—the UPHD—later rebranded as the ACDU, fine: but they did not retroactively defend a case that took place four years before its founding on 20 July 2020.
You clearly have both a conflict of interest with a concomitant inability to edit this topic neutrally. ——Serial 12:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So when did the claimants joined IWGB? It seem like IWGB are taking credit for workers who put their necks on the line while IWGB had no liability, Looking at the judgement there is no mention of IWGB. Other then the claimants saying they are members of IWGB union and gave them free publicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:4682:101:2DCB:638D:7869:F1F6 (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial 54129, who said anything about UPHD, ADCU or any retroactive defence of a case? What is your source for this and what has it got to do with our proposed edit? We are simply saying it is not true that the IWGB 'took over' the case. Please state your sources. Its important we are all fair and above board. Thanks.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

IWGB logo.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]