What it means for Bay employers
By Daniel Erickson & Ella Burney
Ella Burney Tompkins Wake
On 17 November 2025, the Supreme Court of New Zealand released its long awaited decision in Rasier Operations BV v E Tū Inc, dismissing Uber’s final appeal and confirming that four representative Uber drivers were employees, not contractors, whenever they were logged into the Uber app.
Although the decision focuses on a single platform, its implications reach far wider. Many Bay of Plenty businesses rely on contractors, gig workers, seasonal labour, or on demand staffing. The Court’s reasoning offers an important reminder of how employment status is determined in New Zealand.
Daniel Erickson Tompkins Wake
How the Court reached its decision
The Employment Relations Act 2000 requires the courts to look past labels and identify the real nature of the working relationship. Parties may call the worker an “independent contractor”, and contracts may be drafted to support that position, but the Employment Relations Authority or Employment Court will look at “the real nature of the relationship”. What happens in practice?
Uber relied heavily on its standard form documents, which described drivers as independent providers using a digital platform to access “lead generation services”. The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeal that these statements were “window dressing”, designed to disguise the true nature of the relationship and avoid employment obligations.
Instead, the Court focused on the practical indicators of control, integration, and economic dependence.
- Control: Uber set pricing unilaterally through its algorithm, managed driver performance through ratings and de-activation processes, and monitored behaviour, routes, and acceptance rates. Drivers had very limited discretion about how work was performed.
- Integration: Drivers were the public face of Uber’s core passenger transport business. They had no independent customers, no brand of their own, and no ability to build goodwill.
- Economic dependence: The supposed flexibility of choosing when to log on or off did not outweigh the level of subordination created while the app was active.
These factors pointed clearly to employment. The Supreme Court therefore upheld the lower courts’ findings and confirmed that the drivers were employees whenever logged in.
What Bay businesses should take from the ruling
The decision reinforces several principles that matter for businesses across the region.
- Labels are not enough. Calling someone a contractor does not carry weight if the working relationship functions like employment.
- Digital control counts as managerial control. Algorithmic pricing, app-based allocation, automated performance systems, and platform rules are all treated as forms of direction and supervision.
- Integration is key. Workers who are central to the business’ core activities, and who cannot build their own client base, are more likely to be employees.
- Power imbalance is relevant. The Court highlighted the importance of bargaining power and signalled increased scrutiny of standardised contractor agreements.
Upcoming legislative changes
This ruling lands at the same time the Government is progressing the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. The Bill proposes a new “gateway test” that would deem a worker to be a contractor if certain conditions are met. These conditions include having a written contractor agreement, freedom to work for others, no requirement to be available at specified times or ability to subcontract the work, and a genuine opportunity to obtain independent advice before signing.
The Supreme Court’s emphasis on power imbalance suggests this last point may become a key area of challenge if the Bill is enacted.
What to do now
Bay of Plenty businesses that rely on contractors should review both their agreements and their day to day operating model. If control, supervision, or integration resembles employment, there may be risk exposure.
Tompkins Wake’s Employment Team can help businesses assess their arrangements and prepare for the potential impact of the gateway test.
- Daniel Erickson is a Partner at Tompkins Wake, Auckland. He can be reached on 09 558 0624, or daniel.erickson@tompkinswake.co.nz
- Ella Burney is a Solicitor at Tompkins Wake, Hamilton. She can be reached on 07 245 0593, or ella.burney@tompkinswake.co.nz
