Uber Faces Pay Discrimination Claims From Female Engineers
The already lengthy legal docket for embattled Uber Technologies Inc. is only continuing to grow, it seems.
October 24, 2017 at 02:40 PM
6 minute read
Photo credit: Diego Radzinschi/ALM
The already lengthy legal docket for embattled Uber Technologies Inc. is only continuing to grow, it seems. Three female engineers—two former employees and one current—filed a lawsuit in California court Tuesday alleging unequal pay at the company.
Ingrid Avendaño, Roxana del Toro Lopez and Ana Medina claim in their suit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, that they were paid less than their male counterparts working in similar roles.
“As a result of Uber's policies, patterns, and practices, female engineers and engineers of color receive less compensation and are promoted less frequently than their male and/or white or Asian American counterparts,” the lawsuit stated.
The three women, all Latina, alleged that Uber uses a “stack ranking” system to evaluate employee performance. Supervisors are required to rank employees from worst to best, according to the lawsuit.
“This process is an invalid performance measurement system, as it sets arbitrary cutoffs among performers with similar performance. … Uber implements this performance measurement system in a way that disadvantages female employees and employees of color,” the lawsuit said.
An Uber spokesperson declined to comment on the allegations.
At least two of the engineers, Avendaño and del Toro Lopez, filed additional complaints with the state of California this summer, as first reported Tuesday by tech news website The Information.
One complainant, according to the report, alleged that “male technical employees made disparaging and discriminatory comments about her, including that the only reason she was successful at the company was because she is 'hot.' In addition, male employees would 'rank' female employees', including del Toro Lopez's, attractiveness and physical appearance.” (These particular claims were not addressed in the lawsuit filed Tuesday.)
The former engineers' claims with the state were revealed after The Information submitted a public records request to obtain the complaints, which were filed with the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency this summer through the state's Private Attorneys General Act.
The Information reported that this legal maneuver has proven effective in avoiding arbitration clauses, which Uber at one time required new employees to agree to if they wanted to submit a workplace complaint. The arbitration policy at Uber was changed last year, but regardless, complainants are permitted to file a lawsuit under PAGA if the state fails to take action on the complaint within 60 days.
“The plaintiffs are seeking compensation for women and people of color who have been underpaid at Uber, and they're attempting to help Uber repair the problems that have led to devaluation of women and people of color in the past,” said Jahan Sagafi, partner at Outten & Golden, who is representing the women.
According to a June article from The Information, Uber changed its pay policies to ensure that employees were not discriminated against based on gender or race. The following month, a spokesperson for Uber told CNN that “to date, our compensation approach has been similar to that of other pre-IPO companies, but as we've grown it's become clear that we need to adjust our philosophy and continue to increase transparency going forward.
This story has been updated to include the filing of the San Francisco Superior Court claim and to add comment from Sagafi.
Photo credit: Diego Radzinschi/ALM
The already lengthy legal docket for embattled Uber Technologies Inc. is only continuing to grow, it seems. Three female engineers—two former employees and one current—filed a lawsuit in California court Tuesday alleging unequal pay at the company.
Ingrid Avendaño, Roxana del Toro Lopez and Ana Medina claim in their suit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, that they were paid less than their male counterparts working in similar roles.
“As a result of Uber's policies, patterns, and practices, female engineers and engineers of color receive less compensation and are promoted less frequently than their male and/or white or Asian American counterparts,” the lawsuit stated.
The three women, all Latina, alleged that Uber uses a “stack ranking” system to evaluate employee performance. Supervisors are required to rank employees from worst to best, according to the lawsuit.
“This process is an invalid performance measurement system, as it sets arbitrary cutoffs among performers with similar performance. … Uber implements this performance measurement system in a way that disadvantages female employees and employees of color,” the lawsuit said.
An Uber spokesperson declined to comment on the allegations.
At least two of the engineers, Avendaño and del Toro Lopez, filed additional complaints with the state of California this summer, as first reported Tuesday by tech news website The Information.
One complainant, according to the report, alleged that “male technical employees made disparaging and discriminatory comments about her, including that the only reason she was successful at the company was because she is 'hot.' In addition, male employees would 'rank' female employees', including del Toro Lopez's, attractiveness and physical appearance.” (These particular claims were not addressed in the lawsuit filed Tuesday.)
The former engineers' claims with the state were revealed after The Information submitted a public records request to obtain the complaints, which were filed with the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency this summer through the state's Private Attorneys General Act.
The Information reported that this legal maneuver has proven effective in avoiding arbitration clauses, which Uber at one time required new employees to agree to if they wanted to submit a workplace complaint. The arbitration policy at Uber was changed last year, but regardless, complainants are permitted to file a lawsuit under PAGA if the state fails to take action on the complaint within 60 days.
“The plaintiffs are seeking compensation for women and people of color who have been underpaid at Uber, and they're attempting to help Uber repair the problems that have led to devaluation of women and people of color in the past,” said Jahan Sagafi, partner at
According to a June article from The Information, Uber changed its pay policies to ensure that employees were not discriminated against based on gender or race. The following month, a spokesperson for Uber told CNN that “to date, our compensation approach has been similar to that of other pre-IPO companies, but as we've grown it's become clear that we need to adjust our philosophy and continue to increase transparency going forward.
This story has been updated to include the filing of the San Francisco Superior Court claim and to add comment from Sagafi.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readJudge Rejects Meta’s Plea to Send FTC Antitrust Suit to Trash Heap
Inside Track: How 2 Big Financial Stories—an Antitrust Case and a Megamerger—Became Intertwined
Trending Stories
- 1These 2 Lawyers Just Became Florida Judges
- 2'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
- 3Trump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
- 4Armstrong Teasdale's London Creditors Face Big Losses
- 5Texas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250