Susan Fowler, the former Uber engineer whose viral blog post kicked off a storm that led to the ouster of CEO Travis Kalanick, is heading to the Supreme Court.
Fowler's lawyers are attacking Uber's arbitration agreements _ policies Uber has its employees sign that prevent them from suing the company in open court. Her legal team has filed a "friend of the court" brief specifically lashing out against the arbitration agreements' class-action waivers _ clauses that prevent groups of Uber employees from suing collectively, thereby denying them a shot at a bigger payout and broader policy change than if they sued individually.
"Class action waivers take from these workers the concerted activity for which they are most likely to engage, and from which they are most likely to benefit: The right to engage in collective litigation," Fowler's lawyers wrote.
The Recorder first reported the filing.
With her friend of the court brief, Fowler is jumping into a group of three consolidated cases asking the Supreme Court to determine whether class-action waivers in arbitration agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act. The cases are: National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Epic Systems v. Lewis and Ernst & Young v. Morris. The cases will be argued Oct. 2.
Fowler published a blog post in February claiming that her manager at Uber sexually harassed her, and when she reported the behavior, the human resources department and management turned a blind eye. She also complained of sexism in the company. The post went viral and sparked a firestorm of controversy at Uber _ including more people coming forward with similar allegations _ which culminated in an external investigation into her claims, the firing of 20 employees, and Kalanick's forced resignation in June.
Uber made Fowler sign a class-action waiver as a condition of employment, her lawyers wrote in the Supreme Court brief. Such waivers are common _ many companies in tech and beyond use them in an attempt to mitigate the risks of collective litigation. But class-action waivers unfairly shift the balance of power to the company, taking away employees' best recourse for correcting employment law violations, Fowler's lawyers wrote.
This isn't the first time Uber's own arbitration agreements have been questioned. In September an employment class-action lawsuit _ filed by Uber drivers demanding to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors _ was derailed when a federal appeals court ruled that most drivers had to bring their claims in arbitration, instead of in court. That case had been on the verge of settling for up to $100 million, but that now seems unlikely.
