>It rejected Uber's claim that the company itself was not liable, because, it argued, its drivers had the status of contractors rather than employees.

Another absolutely fantastic aspect of the gig economy, absolutely no sense of institutional responsibility from anyone. Just a giant game of musical chairs where everyone can point at everyone else.

If a hotel discriminates because of disability or race or whatever else they risk the reputation of their entire business and trivial legal claims. If someone gets a racist Uber driver it's going to be 'they're just contractors dude, we don't know them!'. Shareholder capitalism at its finest. All of the profits, none of the accountability. I guess that is widely considered to be social progress nowadays.

Yet another reason that Uber has given countries to make them treat their drivers as employees.