Lyft Drivers Seek to Untether Cases in California Worker Misclassification Actions

Lyft Drivers Seek to Untether Cases in California Worker Misclassification ActionsA California state judge has been asked to allow a Lyft driver’s worker misclassification lawsuit against the rideshare company to proceed separately from similar litigation being pursued by the California Labor Commissioner under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). 

Lyft driver Brandon Olson filed suit against the company in 2018, alleging that Lyft misclassified him and other drivers as independent contractors. The suit was later amended to include PAGA claims on behalf of other drivers. PAGA authorizes employees in California to file lawsuits to recover civil penalties on behalf of themselves and other employees for violations of the State of California Labor Code.

Lyft contends that Olson’s suit cannot proceed with claims stemming from his alleged misclassification as an independent contractor because an action filed by the state’s Labor Commissioner covers the same issues and time period. Olson’s lawsuit, which also includes class claims filed by fellow driver David Melnicoe, has been delayed while Lyft challenged similar claims.

During a remote hearing on July 7, 2021, Olson’s attorneys told a San Francisco Superior Court judge that tying Olson’s suit to other claims is an “absurd delay” and that Lyft is attempting to force the class action claims to arbitration even though a California appeals panel ruled that enforcement of PAGA waivers is prohibited in California. Lyft had argued that Melnicoe was bound by a PAGA representative action waiver he accepted in its terms of service to arbitrate any disputes with the company.

Attorneys for Lyft argued that since Olson and Melnicoe – as well as all Lyft drivers – are not involved in interstate commerce, the transportation worker exemption in the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply and they must be compelled to arbitration. The Lyft attorneys also reminded the court that a San Francisco Superior Court judge denied a motion by Melnicoe to sever the case in 2019 because “severing this case would create unnecessary duplication and inefficiencies, and it would create risk of inconsistent ruling.”

HBL has experience in all areas of benefits and employment law, offering a comprehensive solution to all your business benefits and HR/employment needs. We help ensure compliance with the complex requirements of ERISA and the IRS code, as well as those laws that impact you and your employees. Together, we reduce your exposure to potential legal or financial penalties. Learn more by calling 678-439-6236.

The following two tabs change content below.

Hall Benefits Law, LLC

HBL offers employers comprehensive legal guidance on benefits in mergers and acquisitions, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), executive compensation, health and welfare benefits, healthcare reform, and retirement plans. We counsel a wide spectrum of clients including small, mid-sized, and large companies, 401(k) investment advisors, health insurance brokers, accountants, attorneys, and HR consultants, just to name a few. HBL is passionate about advising clients, and we are dedicated to our mission: to provide comprehensive, personalized, and practical ERISA and benefits legal solutions that exceed client expectations.

Latest posts by Hall Benefits Law, LLC (see all)