In the UK we have two classifications that are different from self employed (contractors). We have worker and employee. They're similar but differ in the level of control the employer has and the responsibilities of the employer.

The case in the UK decided that the drivers were workers but not employees.

More info: https://www.gov.uk/employment-status

I don't think your post makes a strong statement to this effect, but it suggests it, and it's good to be clear on this point.

This isn't necessarily wrong, but if you want to make the claim, you'll have to say what that new classification is.

Current employment law has a well-evolved set of protections that help prevent employees getting too badly screwed. Traditional contractor relationships, on the other hand, use the power of the market (that is, the contractor ability to either easily switch clients or maintain multiple clients) to keep things fair.

If there's something in between, it can't be the status quo (we treat you like employees when it's convenient but call you contractors so we can screw you over). And it also can't be some midpoint, like an employee-lite, where Uber, etc, just exploit people 50% less than now but 50% more than they could with real employees.