A group of app-dispatched food delivery drivers have servedChicago-based GrubHub with a class action, saying the company has wronglyclassified them as contractors, when they should qualify as employees under thelaw.

Six people who have worked for GrubHub took aim June 28 inChicago federal court against the web-based food delivery coordinator, arguingtheir classification as independent contractors violated state and federallabor and wage laws.

Named plaintiffs included Thomas Souran and Kelly Reardon,of Chicago; Roy Wilkie, of Portland, Ore.; Carmen Gonzalez, of Glenolden, Pa.;Louis Ramzy, of Brooklyn, N.Y.; and Adam Smith, of Bridgeport, Conn.Collectively, the plaintiffs worked as GrubHub drivers from November 2014 tothe present, primarily in 2015. All the drivers alleged violation of the FairLabor Standards Act, while individual drivers also alleged violation of theirhome state minimum wage and hour laws.

A separate class action alleging employee misclassificationis pending in federal court in California; anyone covered in that complaintwould be excluded from the class in the Chicago action. GrubHub drivers from anystate other than California would be allowed to opt in to the Chicagocomplaint, the lawsuit said.

In their lawsuit, the Chicago plaintiffs contended “GrubHubdirects drivers’ work in detail, instructing drivers where to report for theirshifts, how to dress and where to go to pick up or await deliveries. Driversare required to follow requirements imposed on them by GrubHub regardinghandling of the food and timeliness of the deliveries. GrubHub retains theright to terminate the drivers at will.”

Further, “the driver’s services are fully integrated intoGrubHub’s business, and without the drivers, GrubHub’s business would notexist.”

According to the complaint, GrubHub drivers work onscheduled shifts in blocks of time. They must stay within an assigned area andremain ready to take assignments. Drivers earn a flat fee for each deliveryplus tips. The complaint acknowledged that, “GrubHub at times pays minimumwages.”

The drivers said they typically get two to four jobs perhour, and that such assignments can take from 30 to 90 minutes. Because theycan be fired for failing to accept a percentage of assignments, drivers “mustaccept as many” as possible. And because they must stay close enough to theircar to anticipate new assignments and tight deadlines, “drivers are workingthroughout their entire shifts and this time is all compensable under federaland state wage standards.”

Each driver argued they were entitled to overtime pay basedon an amount of hours worked per week or day. They also contended GrubHub’spolicy of making drivers bear the expense of fuel, car maintenance andcellphone data further drops weekly compensation below established wageminimums.

In addition to class certification and a finding thatGrubHub violated the federal and state laws, the plaintiffs also asked thecourt to award compensatory damages, including back pay, plus liquidateddamages and any statutory and regulatory damages, legal fees and injunctiverelief forcing GrubHub to comply with relevant wage laws.

Representing the named plaintiffs, and the putative class ofadditional plaintiffs were attorneys James B. Zouras and Ryan Stephan, of StephanZouras, of Chicago; and Shannon Liss-Riordan and Thomas Fowler, of Lichten& Liss-Riordan, of Boston, as well as Matthew D. Carlson, of the Lichten firm’sSan Francisco office.