Judge Sides With Drivers on Class Cert and Claims Uber Shortchanged Them
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on Thursday found that Uber's agreement with drivers didn't allow the company to deduct its $1 "Safe Rides" fee from the total used to calculate what drivers received from short, low-fare rides.
March 09, 2018 at 03:54 PM
3 minute read
Uber has lost its bid to knock out a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of drivers who claim the company shortchanged them on minimum fare rides after it instituted its “Safe Rides” fee in 2014.
In a 19-page order, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the Northern District of California on Thursday found Uber Technologies Inc.'s agreement with drivers didn't allow for the company to deduct the $1 fee from the total used to calculate what drivers received from short rides that resulted in customers being charged a set minimum fee.
Uber's lawyers at Morrison & Foerster had argued the company bumped up the minimum fare by $1 in April 2014 when it instituted the Safe Rides fee, which the company said would be spent on things like driver background checks and additional driver training. The boost in the minimum fare, Uber argued, resulted in drivers receiving the same payout as before. But that argument didn't pass muster with the judge, who sided with the plaintiffs' reading of the contract.
“Nothing in the agreement provides a formula for Uber to deduct $1.00 from the minimum fare and then deduct another 20 percentfrom the balance,” wrote Rogers, granting the plaintiffs motions for summary judgment and class certification. “The fact that Uber chose not to follow the precise terms of the agreement for the 19 months of the class period and is now attempting to rationalize its conduct is not relevant to the instant claim,” she wrote.
➤➤ Get class action news and commentary straight to your in-box with Critical Mass from Law.com. Learn more and sign up here.
A spokesman for Uber said the company is reviewing the decision.
The lead plaintiffs lawyer, John Crabtree of Crabtree & Auslander in Key Biscayne, Florida, said this appears to be the first national class action that Uber has lost on the merits.
“We're pretty excited about that, to be honest,” he said.
The ruling, however, will cover only a fraction of the 400,000-plus drivers who completed minimum fare drives for Uber during the covered period, since the class is limited to those drivers who opted out of Uber's arbitration agreement.
Crabtree said that about 9,500 “very astute” drivers had opted out and that Uber underpaid those drivers by about $1.4 million. Crabtree said that because the drivers are pursuing a conversion claim, they can ask for punitive damages.
“That's a jury question,” said Crabtree, of the decision to award punitive damages. “We're going to go and try the case and see what happens.”
Crabtree said the 400,000 or so drivers who are subject to the arbitration agreement who would have similar claims to the class aren't likely to pay the $2,000 arbitration filing fee to pursue claims that are in most instances less than $300. “Nobody is going to do that,” he said.
In Thursday's order, Rogers appointed Crabtree's firm as class counsel alongside local counsel at Browne George Ross, and Seattle-based class action lawyer Mark Morrison.
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
© 2025 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 AllBuchalter Hires Longtime Sheppard Mullin Real Estate Partner as Practice Chair
Reality TV Couple and Pacific Palisades Neighbors Sue City of Los Angeles Over Loss of Homes to Fire
3 minute readIn Resolved Lawsuit, Jim Walden Alleged 'Retaliatory' Silencing by X of His Personal Social Media Account
Trending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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