Uber seeks to head off lawsuits with new binding driver agreement

Uber seeks to head off lawsuits with new binding driver agreement
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Uber-seeks-to-head-off-lawsuits-w...
By Carolyn Said
Updated 12:16 pm, Friday, December 11, 2015

Photo: Eric Risberg / Eric Risberg / Associated Press
A man leaves the headquarters of Uber in San Francisco last year. Two days after a federal judge expanded a class-action suit by California Uber drivers seeking to be employees, Uber sent its U.S. drivers a 21-page legal agreement that would bar them from participating in future class-action suits against the company.

Two days after a federal judge expanded a class-action suit by California Uber drivers seeking to be employees, Uber on Friday sent all its U.S. drivers a 21-page legal agreement that would bar them from participating in future class-action suits against the company.
Drivers cannot receive any ride requests until they accept the agreement, which lays out a lengthy provision requiring mandatory arbitration starting on page 15.
“We believe this is an illegal attempt by Uber to usurp the court’s role now in overseeing the process of who is included in the class,” said Shannon Liss-Riordan, the Boston lawyer representing the drivers, in an e-mail.
Liss-Riordan said she will ask U.S. District Judge Edward Chen on Thursday for an emergency motion to block Uber from enforcing the new agreement.
An Uber spokesman said the company told Judge Chen in court on Thursday of its intentions and that he verbally okayed them. Uber said it will produce a transcript of that interchange soon.
“We believe strongly that our agreements are valid, but we are making some changes and clarifications to remove uncertainty for drivers and for us as we work through our multiple appeals on this issue,” it said in a statement.
Uber said the provision will not affect drivers who were already certified as eligible to be part of the existing court case, O’Connor vs. Uber Technologies. However, that point is not explained in the document sent to drivers.
Drivers can accept the agreement while e-mailing Uber at optout@Uber.com to continue working while preserving their right to participate in future class-action lawsuits. They have 30 days after agreeing to the document to opt out.
But the opt-out provision requires reading the entire document and understanding a fair amount of legalese. “Many Uber drivers speak English as a second language and would have a lot of trouble reading and deciphering a 21-page PDF,” said Harry Campbell, a Los Angeles driver who writes TheRideshareGuy.com blog.
One East Bay driver, who asked not to be identified because he fears retaliation from Uber, said he had not immediately understood that he could opt out of the provision. “That wasn’t obvious to me,” said that driver, who graduated from UC Berkeley and worked in a professional job for many years. “Of course, I don’t have a lot of interest in reading 10-point type on a cell phone. I didn’t want to have to use a magnifying glass.”
The driver said he interpreted the new agrement “as an ‘it’s my way or the highway proposition’ since if you don’t sign it, you can’t log on.”
Judge Chen’s Wednesday ruling had said that a previous Uber arbitration clause was invalid, meaning that the vast majority of the 160,000 people who have ever driven for Uber in California could participate in the class-action case.
The lawsuit claims that Uber drivers should be reclassified as employees, and should be entitled to reimbursement for their mileage expenses at the IRS rate of 57.5 cents per mile, for their smartphone expenses, and for tips on each trip.
Uber contends that drivers are so unique and have so much flexibility that they should continue to be considered independent contractors.
Carolyn Said is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: csaid@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @csaid