A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Decision allows two NY Uber drivers unemployment benefits

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
There has been plenty of controversy over the treatment of employees who are a part of the “sharing economy,” with much of the focus on ride-sharing giant Uber. New York state recently declared, with two decisions, that Uber drivers were in fact employees and were entitled to receive unemployment benefits. Uber as well as similar service Lyft have long classified their drivers as private contractors, not employees. As a contractor, these drivers don’t receive the same lawful benefits and protections as an employee would; it’s often much cheaper for the company to hire a contractor than an employee with benefits which are an added expense to the employer. The decision in both cases, however, only extends to the two drivers, not the rest of Uber’s contractors. In addition, the decisions allow both contractors unemployment benefits, but no other benefits a full-time employee would receive. Employees versus contractors The employment classification debate still rages on, with labor rights activists wanting a better safety net for workers. Meanwhile, Uber and other sharing economy companies claim that the personal flexibility of being a contractor and “their own boss” is what their drivers prefer. Bhairavi Desai of the New York Tax Workers Alliance said that Uber has long relied on laws that turn “a blind eye” to what, if any, benefits they were giving to workers. The decisions in New York, he says, will ideally make the labor department to look a lot closer at how sharing economy companies treat their workers. Desai hopes that these rulings will extend to other Uber drivers and to other companies functioning with similar structure. However, New York Labor Department spokesperson Tiffany Portzer says that these rulings are always on a case-by-case basis, and points out other misclassification rulings that have gone in favor of Uber. Misclassification in California We’ve previously written about the issues of misclassification with Uber and their employees in California. Recently, a class action lawsuit against Uber, with a proposed $100 million settlement, was overturned by Judge Edward M. Chen of the Federal District Court for Northern California. The suit was brought against the company claiming that Uber classified their workers as private contractors rather than employees so that the company didn’t have to pay their drivers benefits and allow them legal benefits of an employee. Judge Chen overturned the suit because the settlement was “unfair and unreasonable,” said $100 million is too low an amount for the thousands of drivers who work for Uber and what their status as employees would be worth. It’s very important as a worker in the sharing economy to work with a competent attorney who specializes in employment law and class action litigation. A knowledgeable lawyer will be able to help you pursue the right compensation for you if your rights have been violated at work in California.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.