Thursday, October 1, 2015

Attorney Liss-Riordan Clarifies O'Conner vs Uber

Labor lawyer Shannon Liss-Riordan, who is suing Uber on behalf of Uber drivers that want to be classified as employees, cleared up some confusion regarding the suit during a recent phone interview.

Some clarification was necessary. The case is complicated.

Uber Arbitration Clause

Liss-Riordan filed the case in 2013. On June 2, 2014 Uber changed the driver contract to add an arbitration clause that the drivers had to sign if they were to work for the company. This created two different statuses for drivers:

  1. Drivers who drove from 2009 to June 2014 could be included as the part of the class in a class action suit.
  2. Drivers who started or drove for Uber on (or after) June 2, 2014 could not.
However, the later drivers can still become part of the action by signing up. Liss-Riordan said that Uber wanted to try each case individually so she's going to do her best to keep them busy. She said that she's already had hundreds of drivers call her who wanted to be part of the suit and anticipates that she can easily sign up 2,000.

If you have driven for Uber any time since June 2014 and want to be part of the law suit you can find information on how to sign up at

The Class Action Suit

A court date hasn't been set yet but this is the suit that will decide whether or not Uber drivers will classified as employees.

Uber had argued that there was no such thing as a typical Uber driver so that there was no such thing as a class of drivers. The Uber attorney especially wanted full and part time drivers to be treated differently.

However, U.S. District Court Judge Edward M. Chen "wasn't buying" the argument according Liss-Riordan. He ruled that there really wasn't any difference between full and part time drivers. If the drivers win the suit, they'll all be classified as employees.

Liss-Riordan is optimistic because she thinks that Judge Chen holds much the same view of the law that she does, and the California Labor Commission has already ruled that Uber drivers are employees.

While she expects Uber to delay the proceeding as long as possible, she thinks that she and the drivers will prevail in the end. 


  1. For me, Uber driver should not be employee or part of the company. Liss-Riordan did a good job by depending this kind of case. Before going into legalities by signing the documents, it's better to consult first a trusted lawyer by this issue.

  2. So if started driving with uberx before June 2, 2014 i don't have to do anything to be part of this law suit right? -can someone confirm this please?
    Thank you,

    1. I suggest that you call Liss-Riordan. You can get info at

  3. There are lots of issues regarding Uber, I'm glad Attorney Liss-Riordan Clarifies O'Conner vs Uber. She stands and fights on behalf of Uber driver not to classified as employee. This is totally wrong. | Taxi Service in Irving

    1. I agree this is a criminal enterprise and I admire her for dealing with the Uber bullies.Next up for Uber will be the Teamsters unfortunately I'm just a small potato in a mighty rich patch.