Skip to main content

Uber Independent Contractor Suit Continues, Pending a Motion to Compel Arbitration


For those who have been following the recent litigation surrounding Uber, this is an update on the suit pending in a California District Court, O'Connor, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc.  Several Uber drivers filed suit against the company and alleged that the company violated the California Labor Code when it classified the drivers as independent contractors rather than employees.  

Unsurprisingly, Uber has argued that it exerts insufficient control over the drivers' work to be considered their "employer".  Uber has pointed out that the drivers set their own schedules, work when they want to work, have the freedom to pick up whoever they want, act as their own boss, etc.  I know whenever I hear ads on the radio (or at least the podcasts that I listen to), Uber is always advertising for drivers and markets the position in a similar manner (ie "be your own boss", "set your own hours", "work when you want to work", etc).  Uber certainly has a compelling argument that its drivers are indeed independent contractors.

The parties that brought the suit against Uber, however, argue that they are required to follow a "litany of detailed requirements" that Uber imposes upon them.  As well, the drivers are graded by the passengers they pick up and are subject to termination if they fail to follow Uber company requirements (such as rules in regard to conduct with customers, cleanliness of their vehicles, timeliness in picking customers up, what they can say to customers, etc).  Based upon this evidence, the drivers have alleged that they are actually employees, rather than independent contractors.

At this point, Uber has a motion to compel arbitration that is to be heard by the Court in late October.  If I were the Uber drivers that brought the suit, I would do whatever it takes to get this case in front of a jury.  Something tells me a jury would likely look more favorably upon this kind of case than a panel of arbitrators.

Stay tuned as this one unfolds.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more