U.S. judge rejects Uber's driver expenses
settlement
Send a link to a friend
[August 19, 2016]
By Dan Levine and Heather Somerville
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on
Thursday rejected an attempt by Uber Technologies Inc to settle a class
action lawsuit with drivers who claimed they were employees and entitled
to expenses.
In a case that has been closely watched in Silicon Valley, where many
companies use on-demand workers, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San
Francisco ruled the settlement was not fair or adequate for Uber
drivers.
Some drivers had objected to terms of the settlement valued at up to
$100 million, which would have affected roughly 385,000 current and
former drivers in California and Massachusetts.
Uber drivers contended in the lawsuit they should be deemed employees
and reimbursed for expenses such as gasoline and vehicle maintenance.
Those expenses are now borne by the drivers.
The proposed settlement would have kept drivers classified as
independent contractors. Several drivers who were part of the class
filed objections with the court, particularly because the proposed
amount was well below the total potential damages in the case of roughly
$850 million.
In a statement, Uber said it believed the settlement was fair and
reasonable.
"We're disappointed in this decision and are taking a look at our
options," the company said.
Chen noted that part of the proposed settlement, $16 million, would only
have been paid to drivers if Uber's valuation grew by a certain
benchmark within a year of any initial public offering.
Because Uber could not provide specific information that such an outcome
was likely, Chen said he would not consider those dollars as part of the
settlement. The remaining $84 million, Chen said, represented a
"substantial discount" on the full value of driver claims.
[to top of second column] |
![](../images/081916PICS/news_I15.jpg)
An Uber car is seen parked with the driver's lunch left on the
dashboard in Venice, California, United States on July 15, 2015.
REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson/File Photo
![](../images/ads/current/richardson_lda_031116.png)
Among Chen's primary concerns were claims related to the Private
Attorney General Act, which could come with penalties far exceeding
the $1 million the settlement allowed. PAGA, passed in California in
2004, states that individuals may pursue civil penalties for labor
code violations, and share any payment recovered with the state.
Both parties could reach a new agreement that satisfies the judge's
concerns, said Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney representing the
drivers.
"But if not, as I’ve said before, I will take the case to trial and
fight my hardest for the Uber drivers," she said.
However, Liss-Riordan said, if there is no settlement agreement, the
number of drivers included in the case would drop to about 8,000,
because many drivers did not opt out of the arbitration clause in
Uber's licensing agreement.
(Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and David
Gregorio)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |