Call Our Free Helpline NOW 949-379-6250

Employment Law News

UBER DRIVERS: EMPLOYEES OR NOT?

Posted by Kashif Haque | Jun 17, 2015 | 0 Comments

 ON 

Uber 700x400

It has been a long war between drivers and the app based company Uber. Here and there, one side or the other gets a victory but more and more battling continues to make the fight confusing and convoluted. Turns out, in a very quiet judgement, the drivers may have had a victory. Like always, however, Uber isn't going down without a fight.

Barbara Berwick, a former driver for Uber, filed a complaint with the California Labor Commission for unreimbursed business expenses, among other allegations. On June 3rd, the Labor Commission officer surmised that Berwick was treated like an employee as per California law, and she had been misclassified as an independent contractor, therefore was entitled to the $4,152.20 reimbursement.

In the Labor Commission case, the officer pointed out various points to assert drivers are employees. Upon applying for the company, drivers are subject to background checks and must register their cars. Cars cannot be over 10 years old, and if a driver's client rating falls below 4.6 stars, they can be terminated from the company. Drivers cannot accept tips because it interferes with Uber's marketing strategy (easy, streamlined, transportation). The Commissioner further qualified that the plaintiff did not exercise any managerial skills that “could affect a profit or loss” (i.e. they could not negotiate cancellation fees, only Uber could do that). Other than her vehicle and her time, Berwick had no other investment into the company.

Uber responded that it was a “neutral technological platform” that connected drivers with riders. The drivers chose their own hours and relative locations to work. However, their arguments fell flat with the Labor Commissioner. The company filed a notice of appeal, which turned the quiet judgement into another war cry.

This administrative judgement comes on the heels of a federal court decision (‘O Conner v. Uber Techs Inc.) that denied Uber's motion for summary judgement, an attempt to claim that all issues were resolved or were unresolvable because they are so one sided. This case is also deciding whether an Uber driver is an employee or independent contractor.

Source: NY Times

About the Author

Kashif Haque

Kashif Haque is a trial attorney and one of the founding attorneys of Aegis Law Firm. He served as the 2015 Chairman of the Orange County Bar Association—Labor and Employment Section. Mr. Haque has obtained millions of dollars on behalf of his clients through trial, arbitration and settlement. A...

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

The Quickest and Easiest Way to Hold Your Employer Accountable

At the Aegis Law Firm, we know that you may be going through a difficult time, and we are here to help you recover from the wrongs that you suffered. An attorney at our Orange County or Los Angeles law firm can speak with you for a free initial consultation to help you with your employment issues. We also take most cases on a contingency fee basis, which means that you do not pay any fees unless you win or recover compensation.

949-379-6250

Menu