The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 President’s Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
    • Media
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 President’s Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
    • Media
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Media
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
      • Summit Sponsors
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Master Class 5.0 Trial Academy 2021
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Uber Suffers Another Independent Contractor Classification Setback in California

Posted on July 22, 2015 by Eleanor Smith

imgres-14

In the midst of a series of worker-friendly court decisions against Uber, the California Labor Commission found Uber liable for misclassifying its drivers as independent contractors instead of employees under the California Labor Code.

Uber lost an unemployment case last month in the state of Florida, and in March found itself ordered to stand trial before a jury on the issue of allegedly unpaid wages, including overtime, as well as unreimbursed “employee” expenses under California law.

The plaintiff driver, Barbara Berwick, worked for Uber and its operating company, Raiser-CA LLC, for less than two months in 2014. Her standard driver agreement with Uber set out the relationship of the parties explicitly as independent contractors. The Labor Commission, however, found that Berwick “was defendant’s employee.”

A Test of Control

The California Labor Commissioner’s decision first focused on the Uber/Raiser contract Berwick signed, addressing each of Uber’s arguments as to why Berwick should be classified as an independent contractor and not covered by the California Labor Code. After quoting many of the contract clauses at length, the Labor Commissioner made the following findings:

  • Uber retained control over the operation as a whole, and was “involved in every aspect of the operation.”
  • Uber vets prospective drivers.
  • Drivers must pass background checks.
  • Uber controls the tools used by drivers to the extent Uber dictates details about the types of cars that can be used.
  • Uber monitors the drivers’ approval rating and terminates their relationship with Uber if the rating falls below a specific level.
  • While Uber allows drivers to hire others, only Uber approved drivers can use the Uber software.
  • Uber discourages tips by customers.
  • Uber exercises its discretion to decide whether to pay a cancellation fee to drivers.

 

California Labor Code 2802 requires employers to reimburse employees for all expenses that an employee “necessarily expends in the discharge of the employee’s duties,” which totaled $4,142 for Berwick, interest included. This amount may not seem intimidating, but had Berwick worked for Uber for one year rather than two months, Uber’s liability would be $25,000 for one employee.

See Also: Uber Drivers Seek Classification As Employees

Major Companies, Beware

It appears from the Labor Commission’s decision that Uber has not yet taken the steps necessary to shield itself from independent contractor non-compliance. Despite being in the middle of high-profile litigation, Uber still must reexamine its business model for defects in structure and implementation. FedEx recently settled an independent contractor misclassification class action case in California for $228 million, and it is believed the bulk of the settlement figure represents reimbursement of necessary expenses.

Other national corporations should view these recent decisions as motivation to reexamine their own business models before finding themselves to be defendants in employment lawsuits.

The Labor Commission used the California test for independent contractor status, which provides 11 factors for courts to consider in determining employee or contractor status. This legal test is comparable in many respects to the test used under the federal wage and hour law, but it is not as stringent as some other states. A case is currently pending before the California Supreme Court that may impose a more worker-friendly standard in California than what is already being applied by the Labor Commission.

The case is Berwick v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. CGC-15-546378 (Super. Ct. San Francisco County, June 16, 2015).

Posted in Blog, Business Law, Class Actions, Employment

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Subscribe to Blog and VFJ via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog, the Voice for Justice and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

The U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that the United States has[Read More...]
Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Bingen, Wash.-based Insitu, a Boeing subsidiary, has agreed to pay $25 million to settle allegations that it used recycl[Read More...]
Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

DEUTSCHE Bank AG agreed to pay US$130 million to settle criminal and civil charges that it bribed foreign officials and manip[Read More...]
Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing has agreed to pay just over $2.5 billion to resolve a federal charge of “criminal misconduct” for how its [Read More...]
Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

The mass exodus of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's top staff over accusations of bribery against their former boss has le[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.