from the summary:
"A Brazilian judge ruled that a driver using the Uber ride-hailing app is an employee of the San Francisco-based company and is entitled to workers' benefits, adding to the global debate over labor rights for drivers on the platform...."
Did anyone notice the contradiction? The submitter reports a Brazilian judge requiring that mandatory entitlements be given to Uber drivers, then within the same sentence instead refers to "workers rights".
Entitlements are the opposite rights. An entitlement is prohibition of liberty; If the Uber driver is entitled to receive X dollars in compensation then the driver can not choose to work for less. A right is a grant of liberty; If I have the right to free speech then I can choose what to say without restriction.