Uber Lawsuits in California – The 4 Most Common

Uber is facing four different types of lawsuits in California:

1. personal injury claims for car accidents caused by its drivers,
2. allegations that Uber drivers sexually assaulted passengers,
3. lawsuits based on Uber’s alleged misclassification of drivers, claiming say that Uber owes them back wages and civil penalties, and
4. class actions over Uber’s misclassification of drivers as independent contractors.

1. Personal injury claims for car crashes

Uber is constantly dealing with personal injury claims related to car accidents caused by its drivers. These rideshare car accident lawsuits demand that Uber compensate the victims of those crashes. They begin by filing a claim against the driver’s insurance or Uber’s auto insurance company. They can escalate if a fair offer is not made or if coverage is denied.

Because Uber can still classify its drivers as independent contractors rather than as employees, Uber cannot be held vicariously liable for these accidents. Whether that classification is lawful or not is the subject of other lawsuits that Uber is facing.

2. Sexual assaults by Uber drivers

Uber and other ridesharing companies, like Lyft, are also being sued in California for sexual assaults committed by their drivers.[1] These lawsuits claim that Uber should be liable for the assaults because it negligently hired dangerous drivers.

Uber’s driver screening process involves a background check conducted by a third party. This is less expensive and faster than the FBI law enforcement background checks, which use fingerprints and the Live Scan system. This lets Uber save money and get drivers on the road more quickly, but does not vet them as well.[2]

To make matters worse, Uber has marketed itself as a safe alternative to drunk driving. Many riders have used it for just this purpose. This has put intoxicated female passengers in danger of sexual assault.

3. Individual misclassification claims for unpaid wages

Many Uber drivers are suing the company for worker misclassification on their own. These claims allege that they are actually employees, not independent contractors. They demand back wages and other benefits that the worker should have gotten had they been correctly classified as an employee.

These include 3 other lawsuits that allege violation of other laws, based on this misclassification:

1. claims brought by several cities and the state of California that allege that the misclassification violates California’s Unfair Competition Laws,[3]
2. claims brought by the Labor Commissioner’s Office at the California Department of Industrial Relations for wage theft,[4] and
3. claims brought by UberEats driver Erik Adolph for California labor law violations under the Private Attorney General Act (PAGA).[5]

Under California state law, worker classification is based on the ABC test. Workers such as Uber’s drivers are presumed to be employees. Uber can overcome that presumption by showing that:

1. both under contract and in practice, the worker is free from Uber’s control and the direction of its business when it comes to the performance of the work,
2. the work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business, and
3. the worker is customarily engaged in an independently-established occupation of the same nature as the work being performed.[6]

Uber has claimed that it is not a transportation company. Instead, it argues that it is a software company whose business is to connect people who want a lift to those willing to give one.[7] Uber is using this argument to justify classifying its drivers as independent contractors.

Under state employment law, as independent contractors Uber or Lyft drivers are entitled to fewer workplace protections. For example, they are not entitled to:

• reimbursement for work-related expenses, like gas, or
• the minimum wage.

4. Class actions for driver misclassification

California Uber drivers also filed a class action against Uber for misclassification back in 2014. This lawsuit settled in 2019 for $20 million. Under the terms of the class action settlement, however, Uber did not admit to misclassification. The company continues to deny it.[8]

Another class action against Uber for misclassification settled on July 21, 2022, for $8.4 million.[9]

To be eligible for a portion of the settlement in either class action:

• you must have validly opted out of Uber’s arbitration clause, or
• Uber must have no record of your acceptance of the arbitration agreement.

The settlements cover Uber drivers who worked between August 16, 2009, and December 16, 2020, or Uber EATS workers who worked between June 28, 2016, and October 7, 2021.

An employment lawyer can help you file a claim for compensation against the settlement.

Timeline of misclassification claims

Uber’s misclassification lawsuits are a constantly evolving issue. Some of the most important things that have happened are:

• March 2019 – The first misclassification class action lawsuit against Uber settles. Uber paid $20 million but denied wrongdoing and continued to classify its drivers as independent contractors.
• September 2019 – The California Legislature passes Assembly Bill 5. This law adopts the ABC test for classifying employees and independent contractors.
• September 2020 – The California Legislature passes Assembly Bill 2257. This law carves out new exceptions to Assembly Bill 5.
• November 2020 – California voters pass Proposition 22. This law lets app-based ridesharing and delivery companies, like Uber, classify its drivers and delivery workers as independent contractors. However, the companies have to provide additional workplace protections, including workers’ compensation for injuries sustained on the job.
• August 2021 – Proposition 22 is declared unconstitutional by a Superior Court judge. The new law was determined to be an infringement on the Legislature’s exclusive ability to create and govern the workers’ compensation system.
• July 21, 2022 – The second class action for misclassification settles for $8.4 million. As a part of the settlement, Uber denies wrongdoing.
• March, 2023 – The California Courts of Appeal overturns the Superior Court’s ruling.[10] However, the court decision also ruled that certain portions of Proposition 22 were unconstitutional, though these could be severed from the law.
• June, 2023 – The California Supreme Court announces that it will hear the case.[11] The ruling will likely come in 2024 or 2025.
• July 17, 2023 – The California Supreme Court allows the PAGA claims against Uber to advance.[12] Uber’s lawyer, Theane Evangelis, vowed to appeal, claiming that it contradicted an earlier U.S. Supreme Court case, Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana.[13]
• September 28, 2023 – The California Courts of Appeal allows the Unfair Trade Practices claim against Uber to move forward.[14] Uber had argued that the California Attorney General and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) were bound by the arbitration agreements that its drivers had signed, but the court disagreed.

Legal Citations:

[1] Jessica Bursztynsky, “Uber faces suit from women alleging sexual assault by drivers,” CNBC (July 15, 2022).

[2] Douglas MacMillan, “Uber Settles With California Regulators for Up to $25 Million,” The Wall Street Journal (April 7, 2016).

[3] State of California v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. CJC-21-005179.

[4] Press Release, “Labor Commissioner’s Office Files Lawsuits against Uber and Lyft for Engaging in Systemic Wage Theft,” (August 5, 2020).

[5] Daniel Wiessner, “Court rules against Uber in major win for California workers,” Reuters (July 18, 2023).

[6] Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018).

[7] Joel Rosenblatt, “Uber’s Future May Depend on Convincing the World Drivers Aren’t Part of its ‘Core Business,’” Time (September 12, 2019).

[8] O’Connor, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., (N.D. Cal., 2019) Case No. 13-cv-03826-EMC.

[9] James, et. al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., (N.D. Cal., 2022) Case No. 19-cv-06462-EMC.

[10] Castellanos v. State of California, (Cal. Ct. App., March 13, 2023) Case No.A163655.

[11] Bob Egelko, “California Supreme Court to decide the fate of Prop. 22, carving gig workers out of state labor law,” San Francisco Chronicle (June 28, 2023).

[12] Adolph v. Uber Technologies, (Cal. July 17, 2023) Case No.S274671.

[13] David Astoria and Seth Finberg, “How an only-in-California law could allow one Uber driver to singlehandedly upend the gig economy,” Fortune (August 28, 2023).

[14] In re Uber Technologies Wage and Hour Cases, (Cal. Ct. App., September 28, 2023) Case No.A166355.