Uber investor suit accuses board of compliance corners

A minority Uber investor, Detroit’s Police and Fire Retirement System, sued the company in California federal court on Monday, alleging Uber’s board and C-suite “knowingly cut compliance corners” as thousands of sexual-assault claims have been filed involving

Uber is facing another lawsuit over sexual assault, and this one goes after the company’s governance—arguing that board and top leadership failed to act strongly enough as allegations mounted.

The complaint. filed in a California federal court on Monday by a minority Uber investor. Detroit’s Police and Fire Retirement System. alleges Uber “knowingly cut compliance corners in the name of growing the company.” The suit comes as Uber faces thousands of claims that its drivers sexually assaulted passengers.

In the lawsuit. the shareholder’s complaint targets Uber’s management. including CEO Dara Khosrowshahi and members of the company’s board of directors. It accuses them of not doing enough to address the assault allegations. The complaint warns Uber faces “significant liability in defending these suits and responding to inquiries. ” along with “hundreds of millions of dollars at stake.” It also says Uber’s reputation has been “irredeemably damaged” by “negative ongoing media coverage of the wrongdoing.”.

An Uber spokesperson rejected the claim. saying the lawsuit “ignores important facts and is based on misleading. false narratives from other meritless lawsuits that we have already addressed publicly and in the courtroom.” Uber has said safety incidents are “exceptionally rare” on its app. and that the company is “constantly working to make every trip safer.”.

The investor’s case argues that Uber’s approach to safety collided with its gig-work model. The complaint says Khosrowshahi—who succeeded Travis Kalanick as Uber’s CEO in 2017—“made cosmetic changes to Uber’s compliance practices and workplace culture. ” and “became less brazen in pushing regulatory limits.”.

It then draws a sharper link between strategy and oversight, alleging that Uber’s “culture of prioritizing cost-cutting measures meant that it continued to skimp on compliance or even seek to tamp down on complaints.”

The suit says Uber knew sexual assault and misconduct were persistent problems on its platform. yet failed to adopt measures employees believed could reduce harm. It points to safety initiatives Uber allegedly considered—including in-car cameras. more rigorous background checks. and programs designed to better match women riders and drivers.

According to the complaint, Uber either implemented these proposals only after delays or rejected them. The suit says Uber studied adding in-car cameras to drivers’ vehicles around 2017 and “found the plan to be feasible. cost-effective. likely to reduce the incidence of misconduct. and help drivers.” But it alleges Uber declined to add cameras because doing so would require “exercising greater control over drivers’ activities. ” which the complaint says would “weaken Uber’s argument that its drivers are independent contractors.”.

The complaint emphasizes that Uber drivers are paid per trip or task and do not receive benefits such as healthcare that employees typically receive.

With thousands of sexual-assault lawsuits already filed, the investor suit argues the board caused “Uber to engage in unlawful conduct.” The plaintiffs say the company now faces litigation costs, regulatory scrutiny, and lasting reputational damage tied to “years of inadequate oversight.

The dispute lands at a moment when gig-economy companies are under intense pressure over safety and accountability. Here. the central fight is not only over individual allegations. but over whether Uber’s leadership put growth and cost control ahead of compliance decisions that the investor says could have made trips safer.

Uber Dara Khosrowshahi board of directors sexual assault lawsuit gig work compliance in-car cameras independent contractors Detroit's Police and Fire Retirement System California federal court