In the Headlines: Uber Ended Forced Arbitration… Or Did It? May 22, 2018 Uber recently made headlines once again by announcing it will end forced arbitration in individual cases of harassment or sexual assault. Competitor Lyft quickly followed suit, while Facebook has come out as recently as March defending its use of arbitration in all cases. While Uber’s announcement marks a shift in the company’s stance, it is far from a complete policy overhaul and it has become ever-more important to determine where and when both employees and customers remain vulnerable. Why Should Forced Arbitration Matter for You? When claims are required to be settled in arbitration, both employees and customers of a firm have no choice but to settle all legal disputes outside of the courtroom. In some cases, forced arbitration comes with the requirement that plaintiffs sign non-disclosure agreements (NDA’s). This means that not only are they unable to tell their stories in court, they are unable to share their stories at all. This agreement to attend a confidential arbitration has been condemned by many in both the media and Congress for silencing victims and potentially perpetuating the underlying problems, especially as it relates to harassment and discrimination claims. Last year, a bill introduced by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) proposed legislating a ban on forced arbitration for all harassment claims – and received bipartisan support. However, while widely popular, the bill has yet to go to the floor, and the issue forced arbitration therefore remains a company-by-company question. So, while you may believe you can take your employer or ride-service to court, such a lawsuit may still be prohibited under the terms of use to which many people automatically agree. What Prompted Uber’s Policy Change? Uber’s move comes less than three weeks after 14 women who have alleged sexual assault by their Uber drivers published an open letter to the company’s board urging them to allow victims to pursue justice in an open courtroom. The letter proclaims that Uber’s motto, “We do the right thing. Period”, cannot be true if the company forces alleged harassment victims into arbitration rather than letting them tell their stories in court. It seems the letter worked. This week, in a blog post on Uber’s website, Chief Legal Officer Tony West announced that: Not only riders, but drivers and employees alike, who have been sexually assaulted or discriminated against are now free to choose the venue in which they pursue their claims against the company. Is this the end of forced arbitration? Resoundingly – no! Both Uber’s policies as well as current federal statutes, still leave employees, contractors, and customers broadly exposed to limitations on open-court lawsuits, as forced arbitration remains safely within the letter of the law. Many companies, Facebook being one of the most notable, are upholding and fervently defending their policies prohibiting litigation against them. Even at Uber and Lyft, where some progress has been made, the departure from forced arbitration is being very narrowly applied. All other disputes at the companies will continue to be forced into arbitration – including wage and hour, personal injury, and all class action claims. Given that there is still no law preventing forced arbitration even in the case of harassment claims, victims are still left reviewing the fine print after the fact. About Hekmat Law Group Hekmat Law Group is a law firm founded in 2013 dedicated to fighting for employee and consumer rights. The firm represents employees in wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, unpaid wages and other employment matters as well as consumers ripped off through false advertising or other unfair (and unlawful) business practices. The firm has offices in Los Angeles, CA and New York, NY. For additional information, please visit HekmatLaw.com
