The question of whether a worker is classified as an employee or an independent contractor is critical in New Zealand employment law, impacting access to legal rights, entitlements, and protections. A recent landmark decision by the Court of Appeal, which ruled that several Uber drivers were indeed employees rather than contractors, has significantly altered the landscape of employment rights. This decision, which upheld a 2020 Employment Court ruling, is a significant development for workers who have long been denied basic employment protections due to their classification as contractors.
The Court of Appeal’s Decision: Redefining the Gig Economy
The gig economy, characterised by short-term contracts and freelance work, has thrived in recent years with the rise of platforms like Uber, Lyft, and Deliveroo. These companies argue that their drivers and delivery workers are contractors, offering flexibility in exchange for limited obligations. However, this structure often results in workers missing out on fundamental employment rights like the minimum wage, holiday pay, sick leave, and protection against unjustified dismissal.
In the Court of Appeal case, the central issue was whether Uber drivers were genuinely independent contractors or if their relationship with the company made them employees. The Court reinforced the importance of determining the “real nature of the relationship,” as outlined in Section 6 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA). This section requires a holistic assessment, considering what is stated in contracts and the actual work arrangements and power dynamics between the parties. The Court found that despite the contractual language, the level of control Uber exercised over its drivers — including setting fare prices, allocating jobs, and monitoring performance — indicated an employment relationship.
This decision has far-reaching implications, particularly in industries where the line between contractor and employee has been blurred. It raises the stakes for businesses classifying workers as contractors to minimise costs and avoid legal obligations.
Key Takeaway: What Does The Uber Case Mean for You?
The key takeaway here is that the legal lines between being a contractor and an employee have become very blurry. The difference between employee and contractor status isn’t just technical — it affects your income, job security, and overall well-being.
Understanding the true nature of your work relationship is the first step toward ensuring you receive what you’re legally owed, and you must take this step to protect your rights. If you’ve been classified as a contractor but believe you are performing an employee’s duties, you could miss out on the rights and benefits you’re entitled to under New Zealand law.
Seek Justice with Sacked Kiwi
Unsure if you’re an employee or a contractor? Contact Sacked Kiwi today and begin your journey towards justice. Our team specialises in employment law and can help you navigate the complex legal landscape to secure the rights you deserve.
The Appeal of Misclassification for Employers
For many employers, classifying workers as contractors is an attractive option. Contractors do not have the same legal entitlements as employees, allowing businesses to save money on wages, leave entitlements, and compliance costs. However, this practice often exploits workers who should, by law, be entitled to these protections. This exploitation is a concerning issue that needs to be addressed.
The misclassification issue is particularly concerning in industries with vulnerable workers, such as hospitality, cleaning, and gig work. When workers who depend on consistent income are labelled as contractors, it can leave them without a safety net, forced to absorb business costs like insurance, equipment, and GST while lacking job security. Many of these so-called contractors are entirely dependent on one client, work under direct supervision, and do not operate businesses of their own — key indicators of an employment relationship.
The Legal Criteria for Determining Employment Status
Under Section 6 of the ERA, several tests guide whether a worker is an employee or a contractor:
- The Intention of the Parties: Courts will consider what the written contract states, but they will also look beyond the text to the real nature of the relationship.
- Control and Independence: If the employer has significant control over how, when, and where the work is done, this points towards an employment relationship. Conversely, genuine contractors typically have greater autonomy and discretion.
- Integration: A worker who is integrated into the core business and performs tasks central to the employer’s operations is more likely to be deemed an employee.
- Fundamental Economic Reality: Employees are economically dependent on their employers, whereas contractors typically take on business risks, supply their tools, and operate as independent entities.
In many cases, these criteria highlight that so-called contractors are, in fact, employees who are being denied their rightful entitlements.
The Consequences of Misclassification
The ramifications of misclassification are severe. Workers misclassified as contractors miss out on vital protections under New Zealand law, including:
Minimum Wage
Contractors can be paid below minimum wage, as their earnings are often linked to the amount of work they can secure.
Holiday and Sick Leave
Contractors must absorb the financial burden of taking time off without formal leave entitlements.
Unjustified Dismissal Protections
Contractors generally have no recourse if their work is terminated without good cause.
This creates a power imbalance, leaving workers with few options if they are treated unfairly. The recent Court of Appeal decision is a step towards correcting this imbalance by holding companies accountable for misusing contractor classifications.
Legal Disclaimer
The content posted on the Sacked Kiwis website should not be considered or relied upon as legal advice or opinion. The information presented here is not intended to serve as legal guidance. Over time, laws and regulations evolve, potentially altering the accuracy of previously shared information. Updates in jurisprudence or legislation (for example, changes to the Employment Relations Act), which could happen without immediate notice, may render the legal information on this platform outdated or obsolete. Seeking legal advice is always advisable.
Should you need employment advice, please don’t hesitate to contact us through our toll-free hotline.
