New Lawsuit Against Uber Is Set to Test Its Classification of Workers

Uber did not have any comment on the class-action suit beyond what it said on Wednesday.

A summary judgment decision in 2015 in another high-profile case against Uber, also brought by Ms. Liss-Riordan, found the argument that Uber wasn’t in the driving business “strains credulity.” And a decision against Uber in an unemployment insurance case in New York said the idea that Uber was not a transportation company but simply provides leads for drivers is a “non sequiter [sic].”

In a related case involving Grubhub, which operates an Uber-like platform that connects restaurants and delivery drivers and which Ms. Liss-Riordan is also litigating, a judge ruled that food delivery was a regular part of the company’s business in Los Angeles, where the plaintiff worked. The judge nonetheless ruled that the plaintiff wasn’t an employee under the state’s older employment test. But under the newer test, which California’s Supreme Court adopted shortly after the Grubhub ruling, this conclusion would likely make drivers employees. Grubhub is challenging that position in an appeal.

Orly Lobel, a law professor at the University of San Diego who has argued against classifying all Uber and Lyft drivers as employees, said, “In the end, I think it’s very likely that courts think that these are employees, but I don’t think it’s absolute.”

The lead plaintiff in the new case is an Uber driver named Angela McRay, who has used the platform since November 2016, sometimes for more than 40 hours per week.

Ms. Liss-Riordan, who is a Democratic candidate for Senate in Massachusetts, said the lawsuit highlighted the issues that had motivated her to run for office. “Drivers are making the business possible but they aren’t making minimum wage and they’re being trampled on,” she said.

Article source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/technology/uber-drivers-california.html?emc=rss&partner=rss