The Brief

Nearly half a decade after public officials sued Uber and Lyft, alleging that the companies were withholding billions of dollars in wages and compensation from drivers, negotiations with the state are set to begin Monday and continue for two weeks.

Drivers are demanding that the state push for a settlement that adequately recoups what they say are years of lost wages, improves workplace conditions — such as protections against drivers being deactivated from the apps — and raises wages moving forward.

More than 250,000 drivers who worked with Uber and Lyft between 2016 and 2020 could be eligible for the settlement, according to Rideshare Drivers United, an organization based in California. Roughly 5,000 drivers filed claims with the state labor commissioner’s office in 2020, alleging that they were denied overtime, mileage reimbursement and other benefits employees are entitled to.

That same year, then-California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the city attorneys of San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego sued Uber and Lyft for misclassifying drivers as independent contractors. The labor commissioner’s office also sued the companies, alleging wage theft.

The two actions, in addition to several others filed on behalf of individual drivers, were combined into a single joint case before the San Francisco Superior Court. A closed-door mediation session with Uber is scheduled for Monday, while separate talks with Lyft are set to take place on April 8.

Members of the Rideshare Drivers United organization protest against Uber and Lyft during a demonstration in Los Angeles, California, on Feb.14, 2024. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)The lawsuits and subsequent negotiations cover a period of time before California voters passed Proposition 22, a ballot initiative that allowed Uber, Lyft and other gig companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors.

The proposition, which received more than $200 million in backing from gig companies, including Uber and Lyft, promised that independent workers would receive better wages and treatment, a stipulation that some drivers allege was not met.

Uber and Lyft “have been doing what they want. They take more than half of our paycheck and then leave us in bad condition and deactivate us unfairly,” said Ibrahim Diallo, a San Francisco resident who started driving for Uber in 2015 before his account was deactivated in 2023. “More than half of the Uber drivers have to drive 12 hours six days a week, sometimes even seven days, to be able to meet the bills.”

Drivers don’t get paid enough to make ends meet, and they also have to deal with maintenance costs, registration fees and paying for gas, Diallo said, adding that the ride-hailing companies are paying their drivers less and less each year.

“Uber and Lyft are useful, but we can do better,” he said. “We have to treat people with dignity. They have to get good pay to allow them to take weekends, at least spend time with their wife, with their children, and be happy.”

According to Uber, drivers earn at least 120% of minimum wage during active hours. The company also said it has invested more than $1 billion into direct benefits, including health care plans and accident insurance for workers.

“Drivers come to Uber precisely because of the unique flexibility that it provides,” an Uber spokesperson said in an email. “Prop 22 safeguarded their choice to work independently while ensuring important new protections. The voters of California have spoken — overwhelmingly — and we look forward to putting these years-old matters behind us.”

According to Veena Dubal, a law professor at UC Irvine who researches the ride-hailing industry and has been critical of Uber and Lyft, studies show drivers are making less money than they did before Proposition 22. Researchers at the UC Berkeley Labor Center found last year that ride-hail drivers in the San Francisco Bay, Los Angeles and three other metro areas made an hourly average wage of $5.97 without tips and $7.63 with tips, after taking into account expenses and wait times.

However, Dubal said it’s unlikely that the companies will concede much in terms of future protections for workers because of how much they invested in Proposition 22.

Drivers “deserve every penny of the billions of dollars that are owed to them,” she said. “It’s tragic that this is primarily about getting workers what they were owed 10 years ago and not ensuring that workers today are at least protected by the minimum wage, at least protected by unemployment insurance. Proposition 22 really precluded all of that.”

A federal judge ruled today that the Trump administration is not entitled to personal information belonging to California’s 23 million voters. Judge David O. Carter made the ruling.

Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice sued California, along with 22 other states and Washington, D.C., for access to their full, unredacted voter files. That includes driver’s license, social security numbers and other sensitive data.

DOJ officials said they needed the data to assess whether states were properly maintaining their voter rolls and ensuring "only American citizens are voting, only one time," as Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a social media post in December.

California refused, citing state and federal privacy law. Only a handful of states have complied with the government’s request for their full voter files, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has been tracking the issue nationwide.

What did the judge say?

In Judge Carter’s ruling, he wrote that amassing sensitive information at the federal level would have a chilling effect on voter registration, which would lead to decreased turnout “as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

He added, “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy."

LAist emailed a request for comment to a spokesperson for the Department of Justice but has not yet received a response.

Reaction to the ruling

Jenny Farrell, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California, applauded the decision. The group had joined California in opposing the government’s data request.

“ We think that voters should never have to choose between their privacy interests and the right to participate in our democracy,” she said.

Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former Department of Justice employee said, “The court did what we thought the court should do.”

Levitt and a group of other former DOJ employees had filed an amicus brief in the case, siding with California.

In a news release, California Secretary of State Shirley Weber wrote: “I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration's disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

What's next?

The DOJ's lawsuits against other states are still making their way through the courts.

During a hearing in the case in December, Judge Carter said he anticipated his eventual ruling — whichever way it went — would be appealed, and that a final decision on the issue could rest with the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Superior Court judge has found that the city of Los Angeles violated public open records laws nearly two years ago by taking action on matters related to its homelessness response and failing to report it.

That decision could be a factor in an ongoing hearing in federal court where a different judge is considering whether to hold the city in contempt of court.

In a ruling last week, L.A. County Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin found that the city violated the Brown Act on two occasions in January and May 2024 when it took action in closed session on the following:

— approving an encampment reduction plan;

— approving a memorandum of understanding with the county for support on interim housing beds and other issues.

Afterward, the city did not report those approvals in open session.

The city argued its actions were allowed under the Brown Act because they stemmed from the ongoing settlement between the city and the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a group of business owners and residents who sued the city over its response to the homelessness crisis.

But Kin disagreed with that argument, saying what the city had done in closed session did not fall within the Brown Act exemptions because they were policy decisions, not litigation decisions concerning the L.A. Alliance settlement.

In federal court, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has been overseeing the city’s compliance with the settlement. Carter has said he’s concerned “the city has demonstrated a continuous pattern of delay” in meeting its obligations.

Carter has been hearing testimony since November from city officials and others in an ongoing contempt-of-court hearing. This week, the judge said in court documents that he would consider Kin’s ruling as the contempt hearing proceeds.

The parties were last in federal court earlier this week. It’s not yet clear when that hearing will resume.

Sidewalk vendors can now apply to receive a free, health-code-compliant food vending cart through a new program launched in a partnership between the county and the city of Los Angeles.

Who can apply

To receive a cart, applicants must be at least 18 years old, live in LA County, be self-employed as a sidewalk vendor, and earn less than $75,000 annually from vending, according to a news release. Applicants must operate within unincorporated LA County or the city of LA, and commit to full compliance with public health and safety regulations.

You can find the application here.

Permits to secure

Vendors who are awarded carts will have to secure required permits in order to begin operating as fully permitted businesses. This includes obtaining the Compact Mobile Food Operation (CMFO) certificate from the LA County Department of Public Health and any Sidewalk Vending Registration Certifications or permits required to comply with the county and city sidewalk vending programs.

Applications will be selected by lottery, will be reviewed on a monthly basis, and will be prioritized based on “compliance readiness.” Priority will also be given to those who are based in the county’s “highest-need areas,” as according to the county equity explorer map.

Eligible applicants will be connected to partner organizations like Inclusive Action for the City to help navigate the permitting process and to provide business business support and language assistance.

What kind of carts?

Carts offered through the program include:

• Integrated grill carts for precooked meat for tacos, hot dogs, and hamburgers that are assembled on a cart
• Hot-holding carts for pre-portioned cooked tamales, corn, quesadillas, gyros, pupusas
• Cut fruit carts for fruits, bionicos, and acai bowls
• Cold-hold ice cream carts that store prepackaged ice cream items

Currently, the county and city have 50 hot-holding and 30 cold-holding carts for the first round of awards with 40 integrated grill carts underway.

More about the program

The launch of the Sidewalk Vending Cart Program – which invests $2.8 million in more than 280 carts – follows the passage of state legislation that decriminalized street vendors and that streamlined the permitting process.

“The program aims to help vendors meet new legal requirements, overcome financial barriers to formalization, and operate safely and legally in their communities,” according to the news release.

Los Angeles County Board Chair Hilda Solis said the program can help ensure a “permitted pathway” toward entrepreneurship.
“Many vendors are navigating increasingly difficult and uncertain times due to cruel federal immigration actions, and we know vendors play an essential role in the economic and cultural vitality of Los Angeles County,” Solis said in a statement. “This is more than a program — this is a chance to support small business growth, economic stability, and even generational wealth.”

The biggest mobile network in the United States, Verizon, experienced a huge outage on Wednesday, leaving at least tens of thousands of customers without cell service for much of the day.

An update on Verizon's website today said the outage had been resolved. "We are sorry for what you experienced and will continue to work hard day and night to provide the outstanding network and service that people expect from Verizon," it said.

What happened?

It's still unclear. Verizon has not posted details nor an explanation of the cause of the outage on its website. In an email to NPR, a company spokesperson wrote that the problem stemmed from "a software issue" and that Verizon is conducting a full review.And while Verizon hasn't released a figure for how many customers were affected, the staff at the Downdetector website — where users go to report service outages — posted on Facebook that they received 2.3 million outage reports for Verizon throughout the day. (That doesn't necessarily translate to 2.3 million affected customers.)

Cell networks experience small outages fairly regularly, though, and sizable ones are not uncommon. Verizon had a disruption across several major cities in September 2024, and competitor AT&T was hit by a large outage in February 2024, affecting more than 125 million registered devices and customers in all 50 states.

Sanjoy Paul, a wireless network expert at Rice University, says telecommunications systems have become more complex over the past decade and a half as they've moved from physical infrastructure — wires and cables — and into the cloud.

"What used to be a completely hardware-dependent network transformed into a complete software-dependent network," he said. That shift has given operators more flexibility to add services or tweak products but, he said, it has come at the expense of reliability.

With a cloud and software-based networks, there are more opportunities for glitches and attacks, he said. Small issues with computer code buried inside these systems can have big consequences.

What have been some consequences of the outage?

Users had no connectivity for much of the day and were only able to access "SOS" mode during the outage.

Verizon, which has styled itself as America's best and most reliable network, has been in damage control mode. The company has issued instructions for customers to restart their devices to reconnect to the network if they are still having problems. It also pledged $20 credits as "a way of acknowledging your time and showing that this matters to us," according to their website.

The Federal Communications Commission said in a statement it was "continuing to actively investigate and monitor the situation to determine next steps."

Could it happen again?

Yep — to Verizon or any of its competitors.

Since the cause of this latest outage remains unclear, it's too early to say whether or not this exact thing could happen again. But Lee McKnight, an associate professor in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University, told NPR's Morning Edition outages are "a fact of life these days for major telecommunications firms."

"Modern telecom networks are cloud networks. 5G networks are mainly, like, hundreds of different cloud services," he said. "The telecom companies haven't yet adjusted their training to that reality, that their staff have to be expert not just in cell towers and wireless, like we think about, but about cloud services, like AWS, or Microsoft, or Google."

At the end of the day, experts say, consumers should consider having a "Plan B" for connectivity. That may mean a land line for your house or getting a second phone on a different cell network.
Copyright 2026 NPR