Male Drivers Sue Uber and Lyft Over Gender-Based Ride Preferences in California
November 8, 2025
Technology News

Male Drivers Sue Uber and Lyft Over Gender-Based Ride Preferences in California

Class action lawsuits target women-only ride-hailing features alleging discrimination against male drivers

Summary

Male Uber and Lyft drivers in California have filed class action lawsuits against the ride-hailing companies, challenging features that allow passengers to request women-only drivers. The drivers claim these policies discriminate based on gender, restricting their access to rides and economic opportunities. Both Uber and Lyft introduced such options in response to widespread sexual harassment complaints from female riders. The lawsuits invoke California’s Unruh Act, seeking damages for affected male drivers. The feature has drawn mixed reactions, with some female users emphasizing safety benefits while conservative groups criticize it as unlawful discrimination.

Key Points

Male Uber and Lyft drivers have filed class action lawsuits claiming discrimination due to women-only ride-hailing features.
The lawsuits allege the policies limit economic opportunities by restricting ride access for male drivers.
California’s Unruh Act, which prohibits sex discrimination by businesses, is cited as being violated by these features.
Women-only driver preferences were introduced following numerous sexual harassment and assault complaints against drivers.
Uber’s program is active in cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Detroit, while Lyft’s Women+ Connect operates in select U.S. cities.
Supporters say the features enhance safety and comfort for women and non-binary riders.
Safety reports show significant numbers of sexual assault allegations against drivers on both platforms.
Conservative groups and some public figures argue that the policies amount to unlawful discrimination against male riders and drivers.

Two separate class action lawsuits have been filed against Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc. by male drivers who claim that the companies’ women-only ride-hailing features discriminate against them based on gender. These policies enable users to request that their driver be female, a functionality that was introduced in response to thousands of sexual harassment and assault complaints targeting ride-share drivers over the years.

The plaintiffs argue that by allowing passengers to select women drivers exclusively, male drivers are deprived of equal access to trips, thereby negatively impacting their earning potential. Their legal teams assert that the policies perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes by implying that men are inherently more dangerous than women, which they say violates anti-discrimination laws.

Filed in California, the lawsuits point to the state’s robust civil rights legislation, particularly the Unruh Act, which explicitly bans sex discrimination by business establishments. The lawsuits seek statutory damages of $4,000 for each affected male driver within the state. While only two drivers are named plaintiffs for each company’s lawsuit, the cases estimate that hundreds of thousands of male drivers nationwide could be affected.

TIME reached out to both Uber and Lyft for comment regarding these legal actions, but no official responses were provided at the time of reporting.

The contested women-only driver preference features have been rolled out in various U.S. cities, including San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Detroit for Uber since their introduction in July. Lyft launched a similar offering called "Women+ Connect" earlier this year in select cities such as Chicago, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco, and San Jose. These initiatives enable women and non-binary passengers to request rides with drivers matching their gender identity.

When Uber first introduced this option, the company cited direct feedback from women riders and drivers requesting more control over with whom they share rides. The program was initially piloted in Saudi Arabia in 2019 following the nation’s landmark decision to grant women the right to drive.

Several nonprofit organizations expressed support for Lyft’s Women+ Connect program, highlighting its inclusivity towards transgender and non-binary people. Representatives from the Human Rights Campaign, the National Association of Women Law Enforcement Executives, and the National Sheriffs’ Association Traffic Safety Committee applauded the decision as a positive step in making ridesharing safer and more accessible for marginalized groups.

Despite the supportive statements from users and advocacy groups, the lawsuits assert that these gender-based preferences contradict California’s anti-discrimination statutes and ultimately penalize male drivers by limiting their ride opportunities and earnings. The plaintiffs claim that the feature effectively institutionalizes gender bias within the ride-hailing platforms.

Female users of the women-only feature have voiced strong support for the program, citing personal experiences with discomfort and anxiety during rides with male drivers. For example, Celeste Juarez, 28, told TIME that she regularly selects women drivers for safety reasons and believes the lawsuits overlook the necessity of such options for vulnerable riders, especially during late-night trips.

Safety concerns have been central to the introduction of these features. Uber’s most recent U.S. Safety Report covering 2021 to 2022 documented 2,717 incidents of severe sexual assault or misconduct reported on its platform, with 68% of the allegations directed at drivers. The most common offenses involved non-consensual touching and penetration, with women constituting 89% of survivors.

Similarly, Lyft’s 2021 safety report indicated over 1,800 sexual assault reports for 2019 alone, and 4,000 such reports from 2017 to 2019. These statistics underscore the companies’ impetus to implement measures aimed at protecting female riders and drivers.

Additional safety concerns have been raised about overall driver well-being. A report highlighted that 50 Uber and Lyft drivers were killed while working between 2017 and 2022, prompting broader questions about safety regulations in the gig economy marketplace.

In related court proceedings, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who is presiding over more than 2,300 lawsuits against Uber for passenger sexual assault claims, has indicated that the absence of gender matching functionalities could potentially contribute to liability issues for the company.

The rollout of women-only and women plus non-binary ride preferences has not been without controversy beyond the legal challenges. Conservative entities such as the Heritage Foundation have publicly opposed these features, arguing they constitute sex discrimination under the law. The Foundation’s commentary, produced by legal fellows Hans A. von Spakovsky and Sarah Parshall Perry, suggests that the policy empowers drivers to discriminate against male riders and compares the approach unfavorably to historical racial discrimination by taxi drivers.

Public figures aligned with the alt-right have also criticized Lyft’s Women+ Connect program upon its launch earlier this year. Despite the political backlash, Uber and Lyft maintain that the features respond directly to user demand and are designed to enhance safety and comfort for women and non-binary riders, aiming to create a more secure environment within ride-hailing services for those demographics.

Risks
  • Ongoing legal challenges could result in financial liabilities and required policy changes for Uber and Lyft.
  • There is potential for reputational damage due to accusations of gender discrimination.
  • The lawsuits reflect tensions between safety concerns and anti-discrimination laws in ride-share operations.
  • Political and public opposition might affect implementation and acceptance of gender-specific features.
  • Absence of clear regulatory guidance on such gender preference features could lead to further disputes and litigation.
  • Backlash from male drivers may impact driver morale and retention.
  • Safety concerns remain a significant challenge despite implemented measures, affecting user trust.
  • Evolving cultural debates around inclusivity and discrimination add complexity to corporate policies.
Disclosure
Education only / not financial advice
Search Articles
Category
Technology News

Technology News