Uber Agrees to Pay $10M to Settle Discrimination Class Action
In one of the first of the recent tech sector discrimination lawsuits to reach a proposed settlement, Uber Technologies has settled a discrimination and hostile work environment class action lawsuit brought on behalf of about 420 women and minority software engineers.
March 27, 2018 at 01:14 PM
3 minute read
In what is one of the first recent tech sector discrimination lawsuits to reach a proposed settlement, Uber Technologies has agreed to pay $10 million to settle a discrimination and hostile work environment class action lawsuit brought on behalf of about 420 women and minority software engineers.
Court papers filed Monday night by plaintiffs counsel at Outten & Golden indicate that beyond the common fund payout to the class and its lawyers, Uber has agreed to reform its compensation and promotion practices for class members. If the deal is approved, Outten & Golden lawyers would monitor Uber's reforms for three years after the deal is approved.
The proposed $10 million payout includes class counsel fees, which could be as high as $3 million, a total of $80,000 in service awards for the two name plaintiffs, and a $50,000 payment under California's Private Attorneys General Act—75 percent of which will go to the state.
The proposed deal includes all women and people of color who held certain software engineering positions at the company since July 2013. The settlement requires sign-off from U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the Northern District of California who has been overseeing the litigation.
Uber is represented by a Paul Hastings team including Nancy Abell, who previously represented Qualcomm in a $19.5 million deal to settle gender bias claims in 2016.
An Uber spokesman noted that the settlement involves claims dating back nearly five years, and said “while we are continually improving as a company, we have proactively made a lot of changes since then.”
“In the past year alone we have implemented a new salary and equity structure based on the market, overhauled our performance review process, published our first Diversity & Inclusion report and created and delivered diversity and leadership trainings to thousands of employees globally,” the spokesman said.
Outten & Golden's Jahan Sagafi said that the plaintiffs' team was “pleased” with the result.
“We think that the monetary relief and the injunctive relief show that Uber is very serious about remedying past discrimination and harassment as well as ensuring that the employment practices and HR systems in place prevent discrimination in the future,” Sagafi said.
The tech industry has been under scrutiny for gender inequity of late, and several other major companies have faced similar lawsuits, including Alphabet Inc.'s Google and Microsoft. The U.S. Labor Department also has open investigations of the pay and hiring practices at Google and Oracle.
The Uber lawsuit, in particular, alleged Uber used a “stack ranking” system to evaluate employee performance where supervisors were required to rank employees from worst to best. The system, plaintiffs argued, set “arbitrary cutoffs” among employees with similar performance and was implemented in a way that disadvantaged female employees and employees of color.
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 readSouthern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Trending Stories
- 12 Years After Paul Plevin Merger, Quarles & Brady’s Revenue Up More than 13%
- 2Trade Fixtures In New York Eminent Domain Cases - What Qualifies and How Are They Valued?
- 3Rule of Law: Is Big Law Too Shortsighted?
- 4The Empty Promise of ‘Dubin v. United States’
- 5Weil Partner Exits Raise Questions About Future Firm Leadership
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