California district attorneys accused Uber of weak background checks that led to the hiring of 25 drivers with criminal records. Uber settled for at least $10 million.
Allegations of sexual assault
Uber drivers were accused of sexually assaulting riders in Atlanta, Boston, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Toronto, and more.
“Upfront pricing” disputes
Uber “upfront pricing” nets out in Uber’s favor, increasing effective fees charged to drivers. Details from Rideshare Guy.
In screenshots and details at Quartz, drivers show some specifics. For example, on one ride, the passenger paid $31.02, yet Uber told the driver that the passenger’s fare was $26.96, which led to a net payment to the driver of $17.05 (net of Uber’s fee, tax, and other charges). In other examples, Uber charged the passenger $41.86 but told the driver the fare was $34.85; and $25.65 versus $22.03. In each of these examples, Uber’s statement to the driver about the passenger’s “fare” appears to have been affirmatively false, as the true fare was more.
Underpaid New York drivers
By retaining commissions 2.6% beyond the amount specified in the applicable contract, Uber underpaid drivers in New York. Jim Conigliaro, founder of the Independent Drivers’ Guild, called Uber’s actions “theft.” Engadget reported that the amount averaged $900 per driver, yielding a total overcharge of more than $40 million.
2015 contract revisions indicate that Uber knew it was wrongly taking commission on gross fares, thereby overcharging drivers, though the company denied that allegation.
CEO Travis Kalanick argued with driver
Uber CEO Travis Kalanick feuded with driver Fawzi Kamel (video) over changes at the company.
Kamel flagged Uber’s decision to cut prices and payments to drivers, complaining “I’m bankrupt because of you.” Kalanick replied that the driver was wrong to “blame everything in [his] life on somebody else” and “Some people don’t like to take responsibility for their own shit.”
Kalanick ended the trip by sarcastically wishing the driver good luck.
Kalanick later met with the driver again, reopened the debate, and ultimately made a payment to the driver from his own money.
Arbitration clauses repeatedly criticized by federal judges
Multiple judges criticized Uber’s requirement that passengers and drivers resolve disputes only in arbitration, foregoing lawsuits, group lawsuits such as class actions, trial by jury, and other standard legal protections.
In Meyer v. Uber, Judge Rakoff remarked that Uber’s arbitration requirement is “by no means prominently displayed on Uber’s registration screen” and that the presentation of the requirement is “obscure” and “inconspicuous” (2016 WL 4073012 at *8).
In Mohamed v. Uber, Judge Chen repeatedly criticized Uber’s arbitration requirement, finding it “both procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and therefore unenforceable as a matter of California law.” Among other concerns, Chen noted that the arbitration clause required drivers to pay half the cost of arbitration, that confidentiality clauses disproportionately benefited Uber, that a carve-out for intellectual property claims solely benefited Uber, and that Uber retained a right of unilateral modification. Chen later reviewed Uber’s proposed revision, found it unsatisfactory, and insisted on further revisions. Chen also criticized Uber’s communication with drivers about the arbitration clause under litigation, without court approval.