UBER UPDATE INTL
SEXUAL ASSAULT WOMEN SILENCED BY UBER
Uber is trying to force women who say they were sexually assaulted by drivers to resolve their claims behind closed doors rather than in the courts, a move that critics say silences victims and shields the company from public scrutiny. The guardian reports that court records in a California class-action lawsuit revealed that the ride-sharing firm has argued that female passengers who speak up about being raped in an Uber must indi- vidually settle their cases through arbitration, a private process that often results in confidentiality agreements. Nine women from across the US have joined the case, seeking to represent all women who have been assaulted or experienced vio- lence in Uber cars in hopes of pushing the corporation to reform and better protect passengers. Uber, however, has filed a motion arguing that the riders agreed to privately arbitrate all disputes when they signed up for the ride-share service and thus have no right to file a lawsuit. Uber’s lawyers are relying on a legal mechanism that has faced intense scrutiny in Silicon Valley over the last year as the #MeToo movement has shone a light on sexual misconduct in US workplaces and in Hollywood. Arbitration clauses have prevented victims of sex- ual harassment and discrimination from moving forward with lawsuits, allowing companies to avoid public trials, and critics say it makes it easier for serial offenders to keep their jobs and target new victims. Susan Fowler, the former Uber engineer whose viral account of sex- ual harassment sparked a reckoning about abuse in the male-dominated tech industry, has pushed for an end to arbitration agreements. In December, Microsoft became the first high-profile tech company to announce it would eliminate forced arbitration, recognising that the “silencing of people’s voices” can perpetuate sexual misconduct. “Our clients deserve a trial,” said Jeanne M Christensen, one of the class-action attorneys who filed a motion last month fighting Uber’s efforts to push the women into arbitration. “The goal is to force Uber to acknowledge that this is happening and to do something about it.” Christensen argued that arbitration prevents the public from learning about the frequency and severity of rapes and assaults by Uber drivers and inevitably results in non-disclosure agreements that silence the women, making it less likely that other victims will speak up. In the case of one plaintiff from Miami, an Uber driver carried the intoxicated passenger into her home when he dropped her off and raped her, according to the complaint. A Los Angeles driver alleged- ly assaulted another plaintiff who fell asleep in his car. A 26-year-old plaintiff from San Francisco said an Uber driver pushed his way into her apartment building and groped her. The women are “horrified and shocked that this is what happened to them, and they are also horrified that people aren’t talking about it, and that Uber has been fairly successful at keeping it out of the news”, said Christensen. An Uber representative said in an email: “The alle- gations brought forth in this case are important to us and we take them very seriously. Arbitration is the appropriate venue for this case because it allows the plaintiffs to publicly speak out as much as they want and have control over their
46
individual privacy at the same time.” The representative did not, however, respond to questions about whether Uber’s arbitration settlement agreements allow the women to speak out or if they include standard confidentiality clauses. Christensen also noted that the women already have control over their privacy – they are listed as “Jane Does” in the suit. Veena Dubal, an associate law professor at the University of Califor- nia, Hastings, who has advocated for Uber drivers’ rights, said she has interviewed drivers who have filed claims against the company and were subsequently unable to speak to her due to settlement agreements. People involved in class-action suits against Uber “want the public and the state and Uber to recognise that their experiences are not random”, said Dubal. “They are the result of a structural problem … They want Uber to make changes.” Female drivers have also repeatedly accused Uber of failing them when they are assaulted by passengers, and advocates said the arbi- tration agreements can make it hard for them to seek justice. “Uber has an interest in removing these cases from the public eye,” said Bryant Greening, an attorney with LegalRideshare, which repre- sents Uber riders and drivers. “It’s despicable … It’s a public safety issue and it’s an issue that’s relevant to our community.”
ANGRY ISTANBUL DRIVERS SEEK TO BLOCK UBER
An Istanbul court began hearing a case against Uber last month brought by the city’s taxi drivers seeking to have the ride-hailing app blocked, as tensions mount in Turkey over its popularity.
France24.com re- ports that the suit brought by the main association repre- senting taxi drivers for Istanbul is the lat- est legal headache for Uber which has already seen its licence withdrawn in London. Dozens of taxi drivers held a noisy protest outside the main court- house in Istanbul where the case was heard, brandishing placards including “we don’t want the global thief”. Lawyers for the Taxi Drivers’ Association told the court they wanted the app blocked in the city. The court said it would wait for a report from the association and adjourned the next hearing until June 4. Tensions over the growing popularity of Uber have spread in Turkey, in some cases resulting in violence. Two days before the hearing, shots were fired at an Uber vehicle in Istanbul’s Kucukcekmece district but the driver was unhurt. Uber drivers have also received false calls from people pretending to be passengers who then beat them up, according to a report in the Turkish newspaper Haberturk. Eyup Aksu, the head of the main taxi drivers guild in Istanbul, slammed Uber as “pirates” and warned that the taxi drivers were ready to act if decisions went against them.
Hundreds of Turkish cab operators and drivers protest against Uber in front of Istanbul Courthouse on March 12.
APRIL 2018
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104
