A California judge, in tossing lemons in the direction of Uber, has given the ride-hail company the most perfect excuse yet to make some lemonade.

Here€™’s why: Thursday, United States District Judge Edward Chen rejected Uber’€™s proposed class-action settlement with drivers in California and Massachusetts. The original suit sought to change the way drivers are classified, from benefitless contractors to employees. Yet, in a victory for Uber, the proposed cash settlement allowed the tech-based transportation giant to keep on with its current employment practices, so long as it allowed drivers to accept tips and it stopped terminating workers willy-nilly.

But after reviewing the deal, Judge Chen said, and I’€™m paraphrasing, “œNope. Not going to happen.€”

Except, by rejecting the settlement, the judge has opened the door for Uber to earn some much-needed goodwill with drivers, and not just those in the settlement class.

In the decision, he signaled that he would smile upon the deal if it involved more money. Presumably, then, Uber need only increase the settlement amount, from $84 million (or less than a hundred bucks for most drivers) to some more reasonable figure. Better terms for drivers certainly wouldn’t hurt. And the company could further sway the judge by doing an easy 180 on a controversial topic that would have more lasting implications for workers.

This quick fix? In-app tips. A simple feature, one much like that of rival Lyft’™s, that lets riders digitally toss a few bucks to their drivers at the end of a satisfactory trip.

Because there is no debate. Uber drivers want tips.

Technically, the settlement, as worded, already permits drivers to solicit them for the first time. But Uber has said it will not introduce an electronic tipping mechanism. Tips are not included in the price of rides, the company admitted, but people shouldn’t feel obligated to leave them. E-tips would also complicate the otherwise simplistic app experience, Uber argued.

It doesn’t take a judge to see the incongruity in the amended tipping policy and its lack of implementation.

“€œIn other words, Uber may be permitting tipping, but it is also telling riders notto tip, further decreasing the amount of tips that riders are likely to give. Given the lack of an in-app tipping function and Uber’s active dissuasion of tipping, the value of this tipping policy … is, while not meaningless, not nearly as valuable as Plaintiffs suggest,” Judge Chen wrote in his decision.

“œThe fact that no in-app tipping function will be included will also make it difficult, if not impossible, to measure the effectiveness of the new tipping policy.”€

Plus, realistically, tips will do more to settle discontent with drivers than upping the lump-sum payout, which does nothing for newer workers anyway. And what Uber doesn’t want is thousands of individual lawsuits from drivers, which is exactly what will happen if the class-action suit goes to trial.

“œAssuming a revised agreement cannot be reached, it now seems very likely that the scope of this case may be drastically reduced to about 8,000 drivers, because of Uber’€™s arbitration clause,”€ said Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney representing drivers in the suit. “That means that drivers who did not opt out of Uber’s arbitration clause would need to bring individual claims in arbitration if they want to be a part of this. We are prepared to start bringing these claims individually, and more than 1,000 drivers have already signed up with us to bring individual claims.”€

So, Uber, here’€™s a tip for you: use this setback as an opportunity to be the good guy. Add e-tips to your app. And maybe, if you’re really lucky, you can use in-app tips to distract drivers from the fact that you’re phasing them out and turning to self-driving cars instead.

[email protected] (619) 293-1840 Twitter: @jbruin