Uber Agrees To Pay $9 Million After Declining To Disclose Sexual Assault, Harassment Info To California Agency

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Uber Sexual Assault Disclosure Settlement Overview: 

• Who: Uber has agreed to pay $9 million to resolve an Order to Show Cause lobbied against the company by the California Public Utilities Commission. 
• Why: Uber had refused to comply with a request to submit information to the agency regarding sexual assault and harassment within its driving operations.
• Where: The settlement was crafted before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California.

Uber has agreed to pay $9 million toward safety initiatives meant to increase public interest in passenger safety in an agreement with the Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 

The agreement resolves an Order to Show Cause that CPUC lobbied against Uber after the ride sharing company failed to respond to the agency’s request for information on sexual harassments and assaults claims pertaining to its operations. 

In addition to a $150,000 fine towards California’s General Fund, Uber will pay $5 million to the California Victims Compensation Board, which will be used to help sexual violence victims and fund outreach. 

Uber will also pay $4 million towards targeting issues related to physical and sexual violence in the passenger carrier industry. 

Uber Says There Is No Legitimate Regulatory Purpose For the Information Request 

Uber gave a number of reasons why it did not want to provide sexual assault and harassment information, initially arguing there was no legitimate regulatory purpose for the request. 

The ride sharing company also argued there should not be public disclosure of sexual assaults since, among other things, it can put victims in danger, discourage them from coming forward and only tell one side of the story. 

Finally, Uber claimed that members of its safety team should have a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” that a staff investigation could cause additional trauma and that there was no guarantee the commission would keep the sensitive information confidential. 

Uber’s motion for reconsideration was ultimately denied, and a presiding officer found the company in violation of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure and California’s Public Utilities Code Sections 5378 and 5415. 

Going forward, Uber will be required to provide sexual assault and harassment information to CPUC on an ongoing basis and create opt-in processes for survivors to submit to sharing their stories with the agency. 

A class action lawsuit was filed against Uber earlier this month by a consumer alleging the company charges its passengers more than what it advertises up front. 

What do you think of the settlement? Let us know in the comments or go here if you think you have an Uber sexual assault claim. 

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Uber Eats Overcharges New York Customers on Sales Tax, New Class Action Alleges
• Do You Qualify: Uber Upfront Pricing Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
• Chick-fil-A Delivery Customers Served With Secret Upcharges, Says Class Action
• McDelivery Customers Serve McDonald’s Class Action Lawsuit After Data Breach