Uber faces class action from more than 6,000 taxi drivers alleging illegal activity and “horrible losses”

Uber fringe benefits tax exemption

EMPLOYEE UBER RIDES NOW CLAIMABLE UNDER FRINGE BENEFITS TAX EXEMPTION.

More than 6,000 taxi, hire car and charter drivers are taking on ride-sharing giant Uber in what’s shaping up to be one of Australia’s largest class action lawsuits.

The case alleges Uber, a company recently valued at more than $100 billion, knew it was acting unlawfully when it entered the Australian market, and in doing so, had a “devastating impact” on tens of thousands of taxi drivers and other licence owners in Australia.

The class action is being headed up by Australian law firm Maurice Blackburn and backed by litigation funder Harbour.

“Uber came in and exploited people by operating outside of regulations and it was Uber’s conduct that led to horrible losses being suffered by our group members,” senior associate at Maurice Blackburn, Elizabeth O’Shea said in a statement.

“For those reasons, we are targeting the multi-billion dollar company Uber and its associated entities to provide redress to those affected.”

The case has been 18 months in the making, and Maurice Blackburn is in the process of encouraging more licence owners to sign up, saying there are no out-of-pocket costs. The law firm estimates there are upwards of 40,000 licence owners in Victoria and New South Wales alone.

Small-business owners have told SmartCompany in the past about their grievances with Uber — specifically, the company’s delivery arm UberEats. Business owners allege the platform’s fees are unsustainably high and offers little support to business owners.

Nick Andrianakis, a lead plaintiff in the case and a long-time taxi driver and operator from Melbourne, said in a statement his livelihood was suddenly taken away due to Uber’s alleged “illegal activities”.

“I can clearly remember the day it all became too much — I just stopped driving that day and had to go home to be with my wife. It’s a shocking thing to think of a life’s work being stripped away from you, but this is what’s happened to thousands of people nationwide,” he said.

However, in a statement to SmartCompany this morning, an Uber spokesperson said the company had not been served with a class action as of yet, despite reports suggesting the case had been filed in the Victorian Supreme Court on Friday morning.

“We understand there are media reports suggesting that Maurice Blackburn has filed a claim that will allege Uber operated illegally in Australia. Uber denies this allegation and, if a claim is served making it, the claim will be vigorously defended,” the spokesperson said.

“Over 3.8 million Australians regularly use Uber as a reliable choice to get from A to B and governments across the country have recognised ridesharing as part of the transport mix. We will continue our commitment to delivering a great experience to Australians in all the cities where we operate.”

SmartCompany understands it is not unusual for class action lawsuits to be announced in the media and filed in the courts prior to being officially served to potential defendants.

Case to have broad ramifications

Speaking to SmartCompany, employment lawyer and adviser Peter Vitale says while the case is unlikely to have any immediate effect from an employment law perspective, the class action will “unquestionably” have higher-level ramifications.

“It may impact on whether or not Uber is directly liable for the actions of their drivers, but I suspect there are other courses of action which don’t really depend on if their drivers are employees or contractors,” he says.

“However, more broadly, it is a significant piece of legislation. It’s essentially asserting Uber came into the market as a bunch of outlaws prepared to do whatever it takes to disrupt the market.”

Despite not having any immediate impact on the ‘contractor or employee’ issue, Vitale says the scope of potential litigation and settlement for the case is “only limited by imagination”, theorising there could be resolution beyond just compensation for drivers.

“It’s a question of if this will be used as straight action for compensation or used to leverage how Uber operates their systems and how it engages with drivers. With litigation of this scale, nothing’s off the table,” he says.

“It unquestionably will have an impact, but historically we’ve seen that large-scale litigation doesn’t seem to deter Uber much.”

The lawsuit comes in the wake of Uber announcing it would be raising $10 billion in capital as part of an IPO this month, which values the company at more than $100 billion.

NOW READ: ‘The future of motoring’: Why a former bank worker decided to launch a limo service for Teslas

NOW READ: Making millionaires: Uber’s $100 billion IPO by the numbers

You can help us (and help yourself)

Small and medium businesses and startups have never needed credible, independent journalism and information more than now.

That’s our job at SmartCompany: to keep you informed with the news, interviews and analysis you need to manage your way through this unprecedented crisis.

Now, there’s a way you can help us keep doing this: by becoming a SmartCompany supporter.

Even a small contribution will help us to keep doing the journalism that keeps Australia’s entrepreneurs informed.

Trending

COMMENTS

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
annonymous
annonymous
1 year ago

I would love to sue anybody who tried to compete with me and who offered better value to the end user. That would be great, I wouldn’t have to improve ever. And as an incumbent, I will be untouchable.
What a great idea, make competition something that is illegal, or just sue your competitors.
Welcome to capitalism people.

Vasko Dimoski
Vasko Dimoski
1 year ago
Reply to  annonymous

yeh if they are doing it with out following the proper transport laws. They are a taxi company by the name of uber they broke the law and should be accountable for it .
If not we can come to your work place and change that and give your job to someone else maybe someone from a third world country that is willing to work cheaper lower then the award and if you dont like it bad luck why should you get $25hr when they are willing to do it $7 bad luck if you spent money going to uni or had to follow regulations we don’t care we can get it cheaper .
You got no brains If the Taxi industry has to follow the law which was from pricing to the car to security cameras to insurance to inspection so should everyone taxi fares were not set by taxi owners the state set them UBER sets its own that why when they charge $250 for ride on new years eve you come running to a taxi and pay $50 for the same ride but hopefully they will be aloud to rip you off to and then you will be happy and it will be your word against the taxi driver because they may rip cameras out no need for safety just like uber

Grant
Grant
1 year ago
Reply to  Vasko Dimoski

We all know the taxi industry sucked. Owners speculated on plates and ripped drivers off while providing beaten up Falcons with no A/C and picked and chooses jobs. We all have horror stories, especially women. Uber did not come out of nowhere, the Govt’s and Taxi industry knew and had plenty of time to prepare but gambled on blocking it, lost and now wants compensation for their poor leadership and business decisions. Consumers are voting with their credit cards and typical the taxi industry wants to screw us again by forcing us into their closed market. Even now every Uber trip subsidises the taxis. What other industry gets this treatment?

Andrew Smerdon
Andrew Smerdon
1 year ago

Here is the real reason Uber is successful. Over the past twelve years of FIFO work, probably 90-95% of taxi rides included high prices and whinging or out-right refusal of service (which would cost the taxi driver a $500 fine) due to the fair being around $30. Despite me tipping them $10-$20 they would constantly complain for the entire ride…every time, but there was no other option for transport. Then came Uber, fares are on average, $10-$15 dollars cheaper, they arrive quicker and the drivers are friendly. My point, taxi drivers didn’t lose their livelihood because of technology or regulation, they lost because of decades of a monopoly service with disgusting customer service and a second option arrived.

Patrick Weaver
Patrick Weaver
1 year ago

Maybe the taxi industry should remember all of the years in all of the States when they lobbied consistently to restrict the issue of licences creating an artificial shortage, ridiculous ‘plate prices’, and delivering appallingly bad service. Then they should think about how the industry totally failed to make use of technology for year after year – enjoying their monopoly position to continue to offer appallingly bad service.
It was an artificial market that needed disrupting.