Summary: Uber Technologies does not agree with the judge’s certification of a class of drivers to be employees and is filing a petition to have the case reviewed.
Just two weeks after U.S. District Judge Edward Chen certified a class of drivers that have worked for Uber starting in 2009 until the summer of 2014, Uber Technologies Inc. has filed an appeal. They state that too many key factors were overlooked to leave the decision to a single jury.
Uber believes Chen handled the certification of the class of drivers improperly when he disregarded the vast differences between class members and the desire from other Uber drivers that don’t want to be employees. Uber has adamantly argued that their drivers are not employees because they do not control their schedules, routes, or any other aspects of the job.
Uber’s legal team led by Theodore Boutrous Jr, partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher write in the petition, “The potential ramifications of this closely watched class-certification order are difficult to overstate.” Chen admitted that California employment laws don’t apply exactly to the Uber drivers’ situation, but he is still willing to let a jury determine if the drivers are employees.
Many drivers in the class action signed an arbitration agreement, aiding the appeal by Uber. While the named plaintiffs did not sign the agreement, the fact that others in the class action did should disqualify them. Uber also has an issue with the 400 declarations from drivers that don’t want to be employees as being “irrelevant” to the case.
Source: http://www.therecorder.com/home/id=1202737346969
Photo: fastcompany.com