In a unanimous decision that could reshape the gig economy in Aotearoa, New Zealand's Supreme Court has dismissed Uber's appeal, upholding lower court rulings that classify four Uber drivers as employees rather than independent contractors. This ruling, delivered on November 16, 2025, marks the end of a four-year legal battle and opens the door for thousands of drivers to claim employment rights, including backdated pay, holiday entitlements, and minimum wage protections. The case highlights growing global scrutiny on platform companies like Uber, which have long relied on contractor models to minimize costs and maximize flexibility—but at what expense to workers?.The case highlights growing global scrutiny on platform companies like Uber, which have long relied on contractor models to minimize costs and maximize flexibility—but at what expense to workers?The saga began in July 2021 when four Uber drivers—Nureddin Abdurahman, Julian Ang, William (Bill) Ball, and Lalogafau Mea’ole Keil—backed by unions Workers First (formerly FIRST Union) and E tū, filed a legal challenge arguing they had been misclassified as contractors. They contended that Uber's tight control over fares, performance metrics, and work conditions effectively made them employees under New Zealand's Employment Relations Act.
Key milestones include:
- June-October 2022: The Employment Court heard the case and ruled in favor of the drivers, citing Uber's dominance in the relationship as evidence of employment status.
- June 2023-August 2024: Uber appealed to the Court of Appeal, which dismissed their arguments and upheld the Employment Court's decision.
- December 2024-July 2025: The Supreme Court granted leave for a final appeal, with hearings focusing on whether the drivers met the criteria under Section 6 of the Act. Uber emphasized contractual freedom, while unions stressed real-world control exerted by the company.
Throughout, the case intersected with political developments, including the National-led coalition government's push for the Employment Relations Amendment Bill, which critics say would limit workers' ability to challenge their status—potentially overriding judicial outcomes like this one.