<story><title>Uber loses New Zealand appeal, court rules drivers are employees not contractors</title><url>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/uber-loses-landmark-appeal-court-rules-drivers-are-employees-not-contractors/JDXF52QBBBHPJIQJNFNGYC4JOE/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jpollock</author><text>Employees might not get to claim the cost of their car (loan and depreciation), but contractors will. Healthcare doesn&amp;#x27;t come into it, NZ has government provided healthcare.&lt;p&gt;While you don&amp;#x27;t get vacation, you get to claim a lot of expenses.&lt;p&gt;In New Zealand, it&amp;#x27;s pretty much &amp;quot;at-will&amp;quot; anyways, with the cost of removing an employee typically being 3-months wages.&lt;p&gt;Personally, being a contractor was much more profitable than being an employee, even if I was on the same wage.</text></comment>
<story><title>Uber loses New Zealand appeal, court rules drivers are employees not contractors</title><url>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/uber-loses-landmark-appeal-court-rules-drivers-are-employees-not-contractors/JDXF52QBBBHPJIQJNFNGYC4JOE/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>yedava</author><text>The primary &amp;quot;innovation&amp;quot; of Uber is political, not technological. They&amp;#x27;ve managed to circumvent labor protections and at the same time position themselves as the middleman between drivers and riders.&lt;p&gt;In another Universe, a technology company would develop software that taxi companies can use to provide the same services that Uber does. But that wouldn&amp;#x27;t be as profitable as there wouldn&amp;#x27;t be scope for labor exploitation.</text></comment>