Rideshare companies at SCOTUS

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana set a significant precedent favoring employers in enforcing mandatory arbitration clauses over California’s worker-protection laws. This week, the court is poised to consider petitions challenging California courts’ interpretation of the law’s compatibility with arbitration agreements.Twenty years ago, California introduced the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), enabling workers to file lawsuits against employers for labor code violations. These “representative actions” allow employees to sue on behalf of the state, with monetary awards primarily benefiting the state and partially distributed among affected workers.One such case involves Johnathon Gregg, an Uber driver in California, who filed a lawsuit alleging misclassification as an independent contractor rather than an employee under the PAGA. Despite Uber’s arbitration agreement, Gregg pursued legal action in state court. Uber contested, invoking the arbitration clause, but state courts ruled in Gregg’s favor.Uber’s subsequent appeal hinged on the Viking River decision, asserting that the FAA mandates enforcing arbitration agreements, thus superseding state laws like the PAGA. However, California courts upheld Gregg’s right to pursue representative claims alongside individual arbitration.In Lyft, Inc. v. Seifu, Lyft echoes Uber’s stance, challenging a California appeals court’s ruling allowing a driver to maintain a...