FOLLOW US

“Seattle seeks to impose an unconstitutional regime of compelled speech, forced association, indecipherable government mandate, sweeping disclosure demand, and impairment of contract rights on companies like Uber,” the company wrote in its complaint. Uber further asserts that the city’s demands would significantly alter its ability to make decisions based on its own operational requirements and safety protocols, undermining its privacy policies and ability to protect sensitive business information.

At the heart of Uber's legal challenge is the requirement that the company disclose confidential business information and adopt a deactivation policy that aligns with Seattle’s approach, even if it goes against the company’s operational preferences. Uber believes that such a policy would undermine its reputation and undermine its focus on maintaining safety, quality, and privacy.

Uber’s complaint also highlights that while it shares Seattle's goal of keeping couriers active on platforms like Uber, it disagrees with the specific balance the city has chosen to strike. The company asserts that ensuring consumers receive reliable and safe deliveries is a higher priority than allowing couriers with consistently poor ratings to remain on the platform. Uber also contends that couriers should not be allowed to refuse delivery to certain neighborhoods based on the characteristics of the people or businesses there.

Moreover, Uber believes that protecting consumers from fraud and retaliation should take precedence over the requirement to provide deactivated workers with extensive documentation on the reasons for their removal, particularly when that information may be sensitive or confidential. The company argues that such demands could compromise its ability to safeguard consumers and prevent fraud.

Uber has raised concerns with the Seattle City Council and the city’s Office of Labor Standards about the ordinance since it was first introduced in August 2023. The company claims that the ordinance, as it stands, would lower its standards for safety, quality, and privacy. Despite these concerns, Uber asserts that it has received little guidance from the city regarding how the ordinance would be enforced and implemented, leaving the company uncertain about how to comply with the new regulations.

"Whatever objectives the City may have, it cannot pursue them in defiance of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments and the Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution," Uber wrote in its complaint. Uber is seeking to have a section of the ordinance that applies to companies like Uber with 250 or more app-based workers blocked, specifically targeting how companies manage deactivation processes.