Adverse verdict against Uber: Uber delivery workers may launch more “Class Action Lawsuits”
Adverse verdict against Uber: Uber delivery workers may launch more “Class Action Lawsuits”
Adverse verdict against Uber: Uber delivery workers may launch more “Class Action Lawsuits”.
According to reports, Uber, the US online car-hailing giant, has been hit with a lawsuit in California, involving the identity treatment and work expense reimbursement of Uber delivery workers.
On July 17, the California Supreme Court ruled that even with the arbitration agreement signed, Uber must still go to trial for the next step in the delivery driver lawsuit.
Public opinion believes that this ruling is a huge blow to the gig economy industry in California and a victory for labor rights organizations.
According to reports, in 2019, Uber deliveryman Erik Adolph (Erik Adolph) took his owner to court, accusing the company of treating food delivery workers as independent outsourcers rather than full-time regular workers.
Under California law, employers must reimburse full-time permanent workers for work-related expenses.
In Monday’s ruling, the California Supreme Court said Adolf and Uber had previously signed an arbitration agreement to resolve claims related to his work in private arbitration, but that Adolf had not waived California law.
Give him the right to initiate a class action lawsuit against the owner on behalf of more Uber delivery workers.
It is reported that there is a law in California that is different from other states in the United States, referred to as PAGA.
If there is a violation of labor laws, the employees of the company can initiate a lawsuit against the company on behalf of the California government and can retain a quarter of the compensation received, and the remaining four Three-thirds of the compensation will go to the state of California to fund labor law enforcement agencies.
The California Supreme Court stated that the injured employees can protect their rights through arbitration, and there is no law in California that prohibits employees from initiating collective rights protection lawsuits.
Public opinion believes that the ruling of the California court will affect the influence of a previous case of the US Supreme Court. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court stated in its ruling on “Viking Cruise Lines” that employers can switch to arbitration mode if they encounter employee lawsuits related to PAGA laws.
The ruling of the California court may also allow more California employers to face more employee collective rights lawsuits in the future.
Uber’s lawyers said in a statement that the California Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday conflicts with the U.S. Supreme Court’s “Viking Cruises” case and violates U.S. federal law on maintaining effective labor arbitration agreements.
The lawyer said Uber was considering the next steps to appeal.
Michael Rubin, a lawyer representing Adolf, said that because employees can still initiate class action lawsuits related to PAGA law, some companies in California will think twice when signing arbitration agreements with employees in the future.
It is reported that Rubin is also the attorney representing the plaintiffs in the Viking Cruises lawsuit.
According to reports, in half of the private sector companies in the United States, non-union employees are required to agree to arbitration clauses as part of their employment contracts.
In the event of labor disputes, according to the arbitration clause, employees cannot initiate or participate in traditional collective Rights litigation.
This “forced arbitration” system has been criticized by some, who point out that in labor disputes, employees are often reluctant to resort to the law if their damages are not large, and employees are often the losers if they enter the arbitration process.
Enterprises and employers believe that the arbitration model is faster and more efficient than the court litigation model, and damaged employees can also get a higher percentage of compensation.
After the Viking Cruises judgment was announced, some industry associations in the United States expressed their affirmation that it would prevent employee plaintiffs in California from circumventing the labor dispute arbitration system through the PAGA law.
Regarding the California Supreme Court’s judgment on Monday, some industry organizations in the United States (including the largest corporate lobby group in the United States, the American Chamber of Commerce) stated that this ruling will encourage more employees in California to initiate baseless rights protection lawsuits against companies.
And force companies to sign compensation and settlement agreements with them.
The California Supreme Court said these comments should be reflected in the state’s legislature, which has the authority to amend PAGA laws.
