Rogers v. Lyft, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN ROGERS, et al., Case No. 20-cv-01938-VC

Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION TO

v. COMPEL ARBITRATION;

REMANDING REQUEST FOR

LYFT, INC., PUBLIC INJUNCTION

Defendant. Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 19

In this case, three Lyft drivers have filed an emergency motion to require Lyft to reclassify all of its drivers in California from “independent contractor” to “employee” status, as required by California’s new law governing worker classification. The plaintiffs’ frustration with Lyft’s steadfast refusal to comply with the new law is understandable. While the status of Lyft drivers was previously uncertain, it is now clear that drivers for companies like Lyft must be classified as employees. But this lawsuit—which was filed hurriedly in an attempt to capitalize on the coronavirus pandemic—is riddled with defects. The fact that Lyft is ignoring an obvious legal obligation does not permit this Court to brush those defects aside. Nor, for that matter, does the current health crisis. The plaintiffs’ motion for an emergency…