July 30 (Reuters) - A federal judge in Philadelphia on
Tuesday dismissed a long-running lawsuit accusing Uber
Technologies ( UBER ) of misclassifying drivers as independent
contractors rather than its employees, saying a third trial
would be futile after two separate juries deadlocked.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson comes
after a pair of six-day trials in March and June in which jurors
could not agree on whether Uber ( UBER ) exerted enough control over
drivers for luxury service UberBLACK in Philadelphia to be
considered their employer under federal wage law.
Uber ( UBER ) has faced scores of similar lawsuits. Filed by three
drivers in 2016 on behalf of a class of potentially hundreds of
others, the proposed class action was at one time seen as an
important bellwether.
Baylson in one of the first decisions of its kind in 2018
said the drivers were not Uber's ( UBER ) employees under the federal
Fair Labor Standards Act. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
reversed him two years later, paving the way for the case to go
to trial.
On Tuesday, Baylson said the plaintiffs had not shown that
they could convince a third jury to rule in their favor, and
that granting them another trial would waste the court's
resources.
"No single litigant has the right to continuously monopolize
a district court's docket in this manner," wrote Baylson, an
appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush.
Uber ( UBER ) in a statement said it was "thrilled that Judge Baylson
finally said 'enough.'"
"The fact of the matter, evidenced by multiple failures to
convince a jury otherwise, is that drivers on Uber ( UBER ) are
independent contractors," the company said.
Shannon Liss-Riordan, who represents the plaintiffs and tens
of thousands of other Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft drivers in similar cases
around the country, said she planned to appeal the decision. She
noted that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2020 ruled that
Uber ( UBER ) drivers are the company's employees under state
unemployment insurance law.
"It makes no sense that Uber ( UBER ) drivers are employees in
Pennsylvania for purposes of unemployment but not for wages. The
court was unfortunately very mistaken about the law here,"
Liss-Riordan said in an email.
Like many other cases against Uber ( UBER ), the lawsuit claims that
drivers were owed the minimum wage and overtime pay. Employees
are entitled to many rights not extended to independent
contractors and can cost companies up to 30% more, according to
several studies.
Despite the barrage of lawsuits against Uber ( UBER ) and other
app-based services, few have yielded final rulings on how gig
workers should be classified. Many cases have been sent to
private arbitration or settled.
And the industry has won several victories, including a
California Supreme Court ruling last week upholding a ballot
measure that allows app-based drivers to be treated as
independent contractors.
Baylson on Tuesday credited "the herculean efforts of
plaintiffs' counsel" in litigating the Philadelphia case for
eight years, but said he had an obligation to manage the court's
docket.
"As this case now presents the prospect of an endless loop
of deadlocked juries, swift resolution is warranted," he wrote.
The case is Razak v. Uber ( UBER ), U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:16-cv-00573.
For the plaintiffs: Shannon Liss-Riordan and Jeremy Abay of
Lichten & Liss-Riordan
For Uber ( UBER ): Christian Angotti of Littler Mendelson; Heather
Richardson of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Read more:
U.S. judge says Uber ( UBER ) drivers are not company's employees
Worker advocates tell 3rd Circuit that drivers are Uber's ( UBER )
employees
3rd Circuit will be first appeal court to consider
classification of Uber ( UBER ) drivers
U.S. Supreme Court rejects Uber ( UBER ) bid to avoid driver pay
lawsuit
Penn. Supreme Court says Uber ( UBER ) driver is employee entitled to
unemployment benefits
California top court upholds ballot measure treating Uber ( UBER ),
Lyft drivers as independent contractors