Slashdot Mirror


Uber Tip-Skimming Allegations Could Spark National Class Action

curtwoodward writes "Uber has just raised a monster investment round that valued the company at some $3.5 billion. And it looks like some of that cash will have to be earmarked for more legal expenses. The startup, which offers an easy-to-use mobile app for hailing "black car" sedans and other rides, is being sued in federal court over allegations that it's illegally skimming the tips paid to drivers. The lawsuit also claims that Uber is misclassifying its drivers as contractors, rather than employees. The upshot: If the federal judge certifies this as a national class action, Uber could be facing millions of dollars in potential damages. Oh, and the lawyer behind it? She's made a career out of suing companies for exactly these kind of violations."

16 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. How is that an "upshot"? by hsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, this woman is very successful at class action suits. So, she has made millions of dollars herself, getting back pennies on the dollar for those who were actually harmed. And Uber is the claimed crook?

    1. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you would rather bad companies just go completely free than compensate an attorney for his or her work? Class action suits are incredibly difficult to build, organize and execute. They are far more expensive to launch than a single suit and, often, the amount per-plaintiff is too small to justify an individual court case for each. So, instead, a lawyer or law firm foots the expense of a multi-year process in the hopes of returning a verdict that both pays them back plus profits. That seems completely reasonable to me.

      For some reason people forget that our civil court is often the ONLY recourse we have against wrongdoing.

    2. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by hsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is clearly better for a law firm to make loads of money and toss some scraps to the people actually harmed. Great counter point!

    3. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The alternative is the company is never forced to pay, so yes that is clearly better.

      If you want to see class action lawsuits where the harmed party gets the majority of the settlement then you take your money and fund such cases. You can take the risk of work for no pay, you can wait years for what might be a minimal or no return. Have at it, nothing stopping you.

      Until you do that, this is the system we have. The only alternatives would be to allow companies to steal so long as the amounts were small enough or greatly expand the size of our government.

    4. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is clearly better for a law firm to make loads of money and toss some scraps to the people actually harmed. Great counter point!

      Well what is the alternative? Allow companies to abuse their customers and employees? Because that is exactly what would happen without some kind of balance of power.

      is it right that the only winner in this situation are the lawyers? Of course not. But our legal system was created by lawyers so it is no surprise that it benefits lawyers most. The system needs fixed instead of abused. But until then at least there is some incentive for companies to not use abusive behavior.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    5. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by rickb928 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Our Government has decreed that health insurance companies must pay out at least 85% of the premiums they collect towards their subscribers' benefits. perhaps we could reform tort law to require class-action attorneys to pay at least 85% of the settlements they negotiate to the class members?

      Naw. That's just crazy talk. These lawyers are SERVING us. Their profit motive is above reproach.

      Cronyism. The New Left, same as The Old left, just without the encumberances of restraint, and in league with the Old Guard Incumbent Right, who are desperate to save their current jobs.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    6. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then there would be no class action lawsuits. You do understand that right?

      Health insurance companies are notionally in the business of providing health insurance for profit. Class action lawsuits are not designed to provide restitution to members of the class, just to punish the party being sued and to prevent similar action in the future. This is very basic.

      Forget Right or Left, you are in the camp of ignorance.

    7. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that's usually not how it works in practice. If they win, the lawyers get actual real cash money, and the people harmed by the company's actions usually end up getting coupons for use at the business, or something equally stupid. Why would they want to use the business services if they are suing the business. The people the lawyer is defending should have to get paid in the same currency as the lawyer. If the lawyer gets money, so should the plaintiffs, if the plaintiffs get coupons for store services, so should the lawyers.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:How is that an "upshot"? by Dishevel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you would rather bad companies just go completely free than compensate an attorney for his or her work?

      These lawsuits are not about the people "harmed". They are a deal between two crooks. the crook getting sued gets protection from their bad acts and the crook doing the suit gets cash. Those that were "harmed" get a coupon for future purchases.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  2. Self Driving by stewsters · · Score: 4, Funny

    Good thing they bought all those Google self driving cars in that article a few days back! You don't need to pay the drivers or skim their tips. Good thing that actually happened.

  3. Tip in cash by unixcorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have used Uber and find it to be a convenient service. I recognize the additional fees that go on my card and also tip the driver in cash. From what I read in the article, it sure looks like some sour grapes from the drivers. They agreed to the program and are now complaining that they aren't making enough. Seems like they should find another pimp.

    1. Re:Tip in cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The contract thing is likely not going to fly, if the drivers own their own equipment and set their own hours, I'm pretty sure they are contractors.

      Skimming tips though? If that's true then Uber should be pounded into the ground, balls first. If there's a line on the receipt that says tip and it's not a tip, then it's straight up fraud, 100%. None of this "just tip cash" bullshit, why should riders be inconvenienced because of a company lying to take their money?

  4. We need more unions / workers rights by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Way to many companies are misclassifying there works as contractors or pushing them off to subs and yet controlling them like employees. So they can get it both ways of the control of employees with out the costs / responsibility's of having employees.

    1. Re:We need more unions / workers rights by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Way to many companies are misclassifying there works as contractors or pushing them off to subs and yet controlling them like employees. So they can get it both ways of the control of employees with out the costs / responsibility's of having employees.

      You think unions actually care about the employees, or even care about fairness? I work at a company that is partially union and a few years ago we had a union come in to try and unionize the job that I do. They employed every dirty trick in the book, from harassing people at home, getting the NLRB to change the rules of the election (from counting yes votes as a percentage of all eligible employees to just out of the total votes cast), and, worst of all (and this makes my previous point all the more telling) they actually tried to sue the company for tampering with the election because the company publicized to the employees when the election was. Think about that. The union actually wanted as few people as possible (ie only their supporters) to vote. I would much rather trust the CEO of a company who only cares about their company than the union boss who only cares about his union. At least companies are honest when they screw over their employees. Unions just smile to your face while they take the money out of your wallet.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  5. Scam lawsuit by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uber has a *lot* of enemies in the established cab and limo industry. Don't take any lawsuit against them on face value. You can bet that the REAL impetus behind this lawsuit has nothing to do with tips or contracting.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    1. Re:Scam lawsuit by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ok, so let's say this is some plot by traditional cab and limo companies. So what? If Uber is able to offer cheaper prices than the established cab and limo industry because it is stealing from its employees, that's about as fair competition as a legitimate used car business competing with a car theft ring. If the complaint is true, that means a traditional limo company pays drivers $8 per hour plus tips plus half the FICA tax, and Uber is out there paying people at what amounts to $4 per hour as an "independent contractor" plus no tips and none of the taxes. And those "independent contractors" are in fact the victims of that policy and should be the plaintiffs in the suit.

      That's why we have court systems with class-action lawsuits and discovery and public records and a judge and possibly a jury to sort this thing out.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/