The union seeks a determination that, since Uber has failed to comply with Proposition 22, drivers should be able to pursue remedies under the California Labor Code because they have been misclassified as independent contractors.
A spokesperson for Uber has referred to the lawsuit as a “stunt.”
No due process, no work, no money
Uber fails to provide any real appeals process to terminated drivers, let alone one that meets minimum due process standards, RDU argues. Adequate internal due process would include sufficient notice, an opportunity to confront and examine witnesses and an opportunity to be heard before an impartial tribunal. More to the point, the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act (“Proposition 22”), passed by California voters in 2020, requires Uber to establish “mandatory contractual rights and appeal processes.”
Without any real internal recourse to challenge their terminations, drivers reportedly face severe financial distress and the emotional harm that follows. For example, Mirwais Noory, a Bay area driver, reports that Uber kicked him off the app in November 2024 over what the company said were safety concerns. He tried to show Uber dashcam video to plead his case, to no avail. Being deactivated has caused him and his family financial hardship as he tries to support his four children, he said. “I’m the only one with income,” Noory told CalMatters. “It has turned my life upside down.”
An exception to the ABC Test
In 2018, the California Supreme Court adopted the “ABC” test to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor for purposes of California’s wage and hour laws. The test presumes that a worker is an employee unless the employer can establish three things:
- the worker is free from control and direction over performance of the work, both under the contract and in fact;
- the work provided is outside the usual course of the business for which the work is performed; and
- the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business.
In 2019, the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed Assembly Bill 5, which codifies the “ABC” test into statutory law.
However, in 2020, voters approved Prop 22 which creates an exception for drivers for app-based transportation services such as Uber and Lyft. This left drivers unable to sue the companies for violations of laws that protect employees, but not independent contractors.
Balancing security and flexibility
Being an independent contractor can have advantages like time flexibility, but it comes at the price of job insecurity. To mitigate the downside for drivers, Prop 22 was designed to apply only to those who received certain benefits. These include a minimum wage, subsidies for health insurance and the ability to appeal terminations.
The rideshare industry mobilized more than $220 million in support of Prop 22, and its passage was a major relief to companies like Uber that have faced scores of lawsuits over their classification of drivers. In the weeks leading up to the 2020 general election, Uber and Lyft bombarded its riders and drivers with endless messaging through its apps and by saturating the television and digital ad space.
When California voters overwhelmingly approved Prop 22, many voters likely relied on the promise that the measure could institutionalize protections and benefits for app-based workers, while preserving the flexibility and independence that so many in the gig economy value.
The dark side of the bargain took some time to become clear.
No meaningful compliance by Uber
READ MORE CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW LEGAL NEWS
In hindsight, the language of Prop 22 that deals with the appeals process is troublingly vague, using phrases like “protection against harassment and sexual discrimination” and “mandatory contractual rights and appeals processes,” without ever detailing how those protections and processes should work. The result, the union argues, is that Uber has never complied with the appeals process requirement in any meaningful way.
Bad history
In a long-running lawsuit, California’s Labor Commissioner sued Uber and Lyft for committing wage theft by willfully misclassifying drivers as independent contractors instead of employees. The Labor Commissioner’s lawsuits seek to recover unpaid wages and other compensation back to 2017. This follows from approximately 5,000 individual wage claims against Uber and Lyft. The trial deadline for these state-level wage theft lawsuits is set for December 2027.
Source link
