According to reports, the $12.25 million settlement was based on Lyft’s own driver data. That data put the potential claim for reimbursement at $64 million, which was negotiated down to $12.25 million for the settlement. The reimbursement amount would have been owed to the drivers if they were employees, but because they were independent contractors, they did not receive expense reimbursement for costs such as gas and car maintenance. Based on the settlement amount, each driver would receive an amount less than $60 once attorneys’ fees and expenses were factored in, according to Bloomberg (3/24/16). Drivers would also receive non-monetary benefits, such as a clause in the contract preventing Lyft from unilaterally ending relationships with drivers.
But new data on Lyft’s drivers through February 2016 increased the potential reimbursement to $126 million, double what had initially been determined. Judge Chhabria questioned why the settlement amount wasn’t based on the larger reimbursement figure. So far, he has not yet ruled on the legitimacy of the settlement, but has questioned whether it is fair for the drivers.
“And so I wonder if you’re now in a position of having to explain why a settlement of $12 million, 30 percent of which you propose to go to the lawyers, is a reasonable settlement,” Judge Chhabria said (as quoted in the San Jose Mercury News; 3/25/16), “given the true maximum value of the lawsuit, which is somewhere in the neighborhood of $170 million.”
READ MORE CALIFORNIA OVERTIME LEGAL NEWS
The settlement decision will be watched closely by Uber Technologies, which faces similar allegations to Lyft regarding driver misclassification. Lyft has said it believes the settlement is fair.
The Lyft lawsuit is Cotter v. Lyft Inc., 13-cv-04065, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco). The Uber lawsuit is O’Connor v. Uber Technologies Inc., (13-cv-03826, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).