The distinction between contractors and employees is a critical issue in employment law, with significant ramifications for businesses and individuals alike. Misclassification can lead to disputes, penalties, and reputational damage. This article cites some of the key differences between contractors and employees and refers to the recent NZ Supreme Court decision.
Supreme Court Decision on Uber Drivers
On 17 November 2025, the NZ Supreme Court issued a landmark decision regarding the employment status of Uber drivers. The Court ruled that Uber drivers are employees rather than independent contractors, citing the degree of control exercised by Uber over drivers’ work. Factors such as the inability of drivers to set their own fares, the requirement to adhere to Uber’s policies, and the dependency on Uber’s platform for income were pivotal in the Court’s reasoning.
This decision aligns with a growing trend in jurisdictions worldwide to scrutinise these types of arrangements and ensure workers are not deprived of employment rights through misclassification. The ruling underscores the importance of examining the substance of the working relationship rather than relying solely on contractual labels.
Defining Contractors and Employees
The legal distinction between contractors and employees primarily hinges on the nature of the working relationship. Employees typically work under a contract of service, which establishes an employer-employee relationship. This relationship is characterised by factors such as control, mutual obligations, and integration into the employer’s business. Employees are entitled to statutory rights, including holiday pay, sick leave, and protection against unfair dismissal.
Conversely, contractors operate under a contract for services. They are independent workers who provide services to clients or businesses without being integrated into the organisation. Contractors generally have greater autonomy over how, when, and where they perform their work. They are responsible for their own tax obligations and are not entitled to the statutory protections afforded to employees.
Ramifications of Misclassification
Misclassifying workers as contractors when they are, in fact, employees can have significant legal consequences. Employers may face claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay, and other statutory entitlements. Additionally, misclassification can result in penalties for failing to comply with tax obligations. From a reputational perspective, misclassification disputes can damage a business’s credibility and erode trust among workers and clients.
Practical Considerations for Employers
To mitigate the risk of misclassification, employers should consider the following:
- Review Contracts: Ensure that contracts accurately reflect the nature of the working relationship and avoid using misleading labels.
- Assess Working Arrangements: Evaluate factors such as control, integration, and mutual obligations to determine the true status of workers.
- Seek Legal Advice: Consult employment law specialists to navigate complex classification issues and ensure compliance with relevant legislation.
Get in Touch
For any employment law inquiries contact Blackwood Montagna for expert guidance and support.
