Uber and Lyft face worker misclassification lawsuit from CA Attorney General and city attorneys


California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, along with city attorneys from Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco, filed a lawsuit asserting Uber and Lyft gain an unfair and unlawful competitive advantage by misclassifying workers as independent contractors.
The suit argues Uber and Lyft are depriving workers of the right to minimum wage, overtime, access to paid sick leave, disability insurance and unemployment insurance. The lawsuit, filed in the Superior Court of San Francisco, seeks $2,500 in penalties for each violation, possibly per driver, under the California Unfair Competition Law, and another $2,500 for violations against senior citizens or people with disabilities.
“The companies, we believe and argue, are shirking their obligation to their workforce,” Becerra said in a call today. By shirking those obligations, Becerra said, Uber and Lyft are shifting those costs to California taxpayers.
“American taxpayers end up having to help carry the load that Uber and Lyft don’t want to accept,” Becerra said. “These companies will take the workers’ labor, but they won’t accept the worker protections.”
In a statement to TechCrunch, Lyft says it’s looking forward to working with the California AG “and mayors across the state to bring all the benefits of California’s innovation economy to as many workers as possible, especially during this time when the creation of good jobs with access to affordable healthcare and other benefits is more important than ever.”
Uber, on the other hand, says it will contest this in court.
“At a time when California’s economy is in crisis with four million people out of work, we need to make it easier, not harder, for people to quickly start earning,” an Uber spokesperson told TechCrunch. “We will contest this action in court, while at the same time pushing to raise the standard of independent work for drivers in California, including with guaranteed minimum earnings and new benefits.”
This lawsuit comes after Uber and Lyft have spent millions of dollars to try to combat California law AB 5, which makes it harder for tech companies to classify workers as independent contractors. The new law codifies the ruling established in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v Superior Court of Los Angeles. In that case, the court applied the ABC test and decided Dynamex wrongfully classified its workers as independent contractors based on the presumption that “a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits…”
Those who work as 1099 contractors can set their own schedules, and decide when, where and how much they want to work. For employers, bringing on 1099 contractors means they can avoid paying payroll taxes, overtime pay, benefits and workers’ compensation.
According to the ABC test, in order for a hiring entity to legally classify a worker as an independent contractor, it must prove the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity, performs work outside the scope of the entity’s business and is regularly engaged in an “independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.”
The ballot initiative Uber and Lyft are proposing looks to implement an earnings guarantee of at least 120% of minimum wage while on the job, 30 cents per mile for expenses, a healthcare stipend, occupational accident insurance for on-the-job injuries, protection against discrimination and sexual harassment and automobile accident and liability insurance.
“They’re not going to succeed in any of that because voters are too smart for that,” Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer said on the press call today.
Labor issues have been front and center amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Just yesterday, Amazon Web Services VP Tim Bray resigned from the company, citing Amazon’s firings of employees that were critical of the company. Meanwhile, gig workers have organized a number of strikes and protests to demand basic workplace protections like masks and gloves while they’re on the job. And Uber and Lyft drivers have long been advocating for themselves. Last year, as both Uber and Lyft were gearing up to make their debuts on the public market, drivers staged a number of protests to demand better pay, benefits and the right to form a union.
“This is a big win for drivers,” driver and organizer with Gig Workers Rising Carlos Ramos said in a statement. “Billionaires like to pick and choose what laws they follow. Today, California is showing that no one is above the law, not even big tech. This is a win for workers and for organizing.”
This isn’t the first lawsuit Uber and Lyft have faced regarding the misclassification of drivers, but it’s surely the most collaborative one. Since AB 5 went into effect in January, organizations like Gig Workers Rising have been calling for legislators to enforce the law.
“This is unprecedented speed for a case like this to be brought,” SF City Attorney Dennis Herrera said. “This is unprecedented speed and coordination and I think the fact that you have this pandemic just highlights the danger of the work these essential workers are doing out on the street every day. But this lawsuit would’ve been brought regardless in order to protect the interest of workers and California taxpayers.”
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, along with city attorneys from Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco, filed a lawsuit asserting Uber and Lyft gain an unfair and unlawful competitive advantage by misclassifying workers as independent contractors. The suit argues Uber and Lyft are depriving workers of the right to…
Recent Posts
- Amazon CEO says ‘beautiful’ new Alexa hardware is coming this fall
- Apple will let parents share their kids’ ages to limit app access
- Perplexity’s voice mode gets a futuristic makeover on your iPhone
- Apple just expanded its child safety features with age ratings that could lessen the chance of an inappropriate download
- OpenAI announces GPT-4.5, warns it’s not a frontier AI model
Archives
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- September 2018
- October 2017
- December 2011
- August 2010