Male drivers hit dead end in discrimination suits against Uber, Lyft

A California judge dismissed two class actions from male ride-hailing drivers over women's preference programs after ordering them to arbitration.SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Uber and Lyft won’t have to face claims of discriminating against male drivers after dual class actions against the ride-hailing companies were dismissed.In both lawsuits, filed in San Francisco Superior Court this past November, male drivers accuse Uber and Lyft of openly flaunting their discriminatory policies — something they said makes the “sex-based discrimination quite unlike the mine run of discrimination cases.”“Here, there is no question whether Uber discriminates against male drivers, like plaintiffs, who are disadvantaged by the sex-based policy,” the Uber drivers wrote. The Lyft drivers made the same accusation.The plaintiffs claimed the programs not only violate state antidiscrimination laws by promoting female drivers over male drivers, but also “reinforces the gender stereotype that men are more dangerous than women.”“Lyft’s assumption that male drivers — like plaintiffs who have garnered stellar ratings and extensive ride histories — cannot provide female passengers adequate ‘peace of mind’ and ‘comfort’ is rooted in stereotypical notions that the Unruh Act is designed to root out of society,” the Lyft drivers wrote. The Uber drivers made an identical claim.The drivers asked the court to certify the case as a class action and award minimum statutory damages of at least $4,000 per male driver in California for violating state law.In May, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Jeffery S. Ross granted both companies’ requests to compel arbitration, writing that both sets of plaintiffs accepted an agreement that included a provision to arbitrate their claims on an individual basis when they signed up to drive for their specific ride-hailing platform.“Plaintiffs do not challenge the formation of the agreement, which includes an agreement to arbitrate their claims on an individual basis. Because plaintiffs fail to establish the delegation clause is unconscionable, they must proceed to arbitration where they may raise any antecedent disputes over the enforceability of the agreement and their reverse discrimination claim under the Unruh Act,” Ross wrote in his ruling in the Lyft case.His ruling in the case against Uber was nearly identical.Bryan Weir of Consovoy McCarthy, an attorney for both sets of plaintiffs, filed applications to dismiss the class actions without prejudice last week.“Without the ability to pursue classwide relief in court, plaintiffs have agreed to dismiss their complaint without prejudice,” he wrote in both orders.Ross dismissed both cases this past Friday.A similar case filed against Uber on behalf of male riders in Los Angeles County Superior Court was dismissed this past Thursday.In a statement to Courthouse News, a representative for Uber celebrated both dismissals, saying the company is “proud to stand behind” the platform’s “Women Preferences” program.“These lawsuits sought to take away a woman’s choice to ride with other women — a commonsense option designed to help women feel safer. Rather than allow frivolous lawsuits to stand in the way of that choice, we took the issue to the state legislature, which has now explicitly protected it,” they said.In June, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 623 into law, the result of a negotiated agreement between Uber and Consumer Attorneys of California over the liability of ride-hailing services, with each party agreeing to drop competing ballot measures.Included in the law was language allowing services like Uber and Lyft to offer women drivers and riders a feature to indicate their preference to be matched with other women. Importantly, the section of the law would apply retroactively, regardless of whether the feature was introduced before the law was passed, “including in civil litigation proceedings initiated before the date on which this section is enacted.”Lyft’s “Women+ Connect” program launched in 2023 and matched women and nonbinary drivers with rides of the same gender. The feature, first available in cities such as Chicago, San Diego and San Francisco, allowed female and nonbinary riders to set a preference to prioritize female and nonbinary drivers.In July 2025, Uber announced its “Women Preferences” program, first introduced in Saudi Arabia in 2019, would begin pilot testing in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Detroit. The program gives female riders a “Women Drivers” option when they are requesting a trip. Female riders and drivers can also set a preference in the Uber app to be matched with other women.Both companies emphasized the programs denote a preference, not a guarantee, so riders could still be matched with a male driver.Representatives for the plaintiffs and Lyft did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads