Happy Nice Mall

A group of drivers on Tuesday alleged that Uber and Lyft were engaging in anti-competitive practices by setting prices customers pay and limiting drivers’ ability to choose which rides to accept without penalty.

Drivers, backed by advocacy group Rideshare Drivers United, have put forward the new legal argument in a state lawsuit targeting the long-running debate about the job situation of gig economy workers.

Uber and Lyft have argued for years that their drivers should be viewed as independent contractors rather than employees under labor laws, meaning they’ll be responsible for their own expenses and typically not eligible for unemployment insurance or health benefits. In response, the companies argued that drivers could set their own hours and provide greater independence from being employees.

But in their complaint filed with the Supreme Court in San Francisco seeking class action status, the three drivers allege that Uber and Lyft, while treating them as independent contractors, did not truly grant them independence and sought to avoid giving drivers class action status. benefits and protection of employment status while imposing restrictions on forms of work.

“They make the rules as they walk. They don’t treat me like I’m independent, they don’t treat me like an employee,” said one of the plaintiffs, Taje Gill, a Lyft and Uber driver in Orange County, California.

In 2020, Uber and Lyft will make drivers and voters a ballot in california this would lock in drivers independent contractor status. The companies said such a measure would help drivers by providing flexibility, and Uber also Began allowing drivers in California to set their own fares after that the state passed a law requires companies to treat contract workers as employees. Drivers thought the new flexibility was a sign of what life would be like if voters approved the Proposition 22 ballot.

Drivers are also given greater visibility into where passengers want to travel before agreeing to board. Ballot passed before the judge knocked down.

The following year, new options for drivers were rolled back. Drivers said they lost the ability to set their own fare and now it has to meet the requirements like accepting five out of every 10 trips to see the details before accepting the trips.

Drivers said they now lack the advantages of both being an employee and an independent contractor. “I did not see it as fair and reasonable,” Mr. Gill said.

Drivers said it was particularly troublesome when a passenger couldn’t see their destination before accepting their ride. Sometimes it leads to unexpected overnight trips to remote airports or non-cost-effective off-road destinations.

“Millions of people choose to win on platforms like Uber because of the unparalleled independence and flexibility it provides,” Uber spokesperson Noah Edwardsen said in a statement. “This complaint misinterprets both the facts and applicable law, and we intend to defend ourselves accordingly.”

In the lawsuit, the drivers demand that Uber and Lyft be banned from “fixing prices for road-sharing services” and “withholding fare and destination data from drivers when delivering vehicles” and to give drivers “transparency per mile.” Pay per minute or per trip” rather than using “secret algorithms” to determine compensation.

If the drivers are classified as independent contractors, they sue on antitrust grounds, arguing that Uber and Lyft are interfering with an open market by restricting the way they operate and how much they charge their passengers.

“Uber and Lyft are either responsible employers to their employees under labor standards laws, or are subject to laws that prohibit powerful companies from using market power to fix prices and engage in other behavior that restricts fair competition,” the lawsuit says.

Experts said the complaint would take a long time in federal court, where judges typically use a “rule of logic” to weigh antitrust claims against consumer welfare. Federal courts often allow potentially anticompetitive practices that arguably benefit consumers.

For example, Uber and Lyft may argue that obvious restrictions on competition help reduce customer wait times by ensuring an adequate supply of drivers. The lawsuit argues that allowing drivers to set their own prices will likely result in lower fares for customers, as Uber and Lyft retain a significant portion of the fare and what customers typically pay. carries little relation according to what drivers win.

Whatever the case, courts in California may be more sympathetic to at least some of the claims in the complaint, experts said.

“If you enforce some of the laws mechanically, it’s very advantageous for the plaintiff in a state court, and especially under California law,” said Josh P. Davis, president of the San Francisco Bay Area office of Berger Montague firm.

You might find a judge who says, “This is not federal law. This is state law. And if you do it simply, cut down on all the gig economy complexities and look at this, we have a law that says you can’t do that’” said Mr Davis.

Peter Carstensen, an emeritus professor of law at the University of Wisconsin, said he doubts drivers will be interested in claims that Uber and Lyft have illegally set prices that drivers can charge.

But Mr Carstensen said a state judge could rule in favor of plaintiffs on other so-called vertical restrictions, such as incentives that help connect drivers to one of the platforms, guaranteeing at least $1,000 if they complete 70, for example. Ride between Monday and Friday. A judge might conclude that these incentives exist largely to reduce competition between Uber and Lyft, as they make drivers less likely to switch platforms and make it harder for a new gig platform to hire drivers.

“You’re making it extremely difficult for a third party to get in,” said Mr Carstensen.

The plaintiffs’ attorney, David Seligman, said the case could benefit from increased scrutiny of anti-competitive practices.

“We think policymakers, lawyers, and courts across the country are paying more attention and looking more closely at how sovereign companies and companies abuse their power in the labor market,” Seligman said.

Drivers say taking back options, such as setting their own prices, has made it difficult to make a living as a gig worker, especially in recent months. gas prices increased and as competition among drivers begins to return to pre-pandemic levels.

“It became more and more difficult to make money,” said Ben Valdez, another plaintiff who is a driver in Los Angeles. “Enough is enough. There is so much one can take.”