Yelp Reviewers Launch Class Action Lawsuit Claiming They're 'Unpaid Employees'
from the wtf? dept
Remember when a Huffington Post volunteer writer named Jonathan Tasini sued the company for not paying him, even though he had volunteered to occasionally contribute stories? That lawsuit went nowhere fast, but it appears that others are now trying something similar. A class action lawsuit has been launched by a small group of Yelp reviewers, trying to make the (laughable and ridiculous) case that reviewers on the site are actually unpaid employees who are now demanding compensation. It appears that they're hoping the recent success of a few lawsuits involving "unpaid internships" will now carry over to user-generated content sites as well. To put it mildly, this is incredibly stupid.Nothing about the relationship of a Yelp reviewer to the company is anything like an employment situation (or even an intern situation). They aren't "hired." They don't have responsibilities or jobs that they have to do. They volunteer to share some reviews because they want to do so. Everyone has their own motivations for why, but the idea that it's some sort of unpaid employment situation is ludicrous. The entire argument seems to hinge on the idea that Yelp gets value out of their reviews. Well, duh. But that doesn't make it an employment situation at all. The lawsuit is also littered with out of context snipes at Yelp for other aspects of its business which have absolutely nothing to do with the legal questions in play. Part of the argument, believe it or not, is that Yelp "instructed" these "unpaid employees" to do more work... because it had policies associated with its various gamification mechanisms to encourage them to write more. For example, Yelp has long had a "Yelp Elite" status, but if you're not contributing lots of reviews, you can lose that status. But, again, all of that is voluntary and is no different than tons of sites with gamification/badges for activity. To argue that constitutes an employment relationship is simply laughable.
It appears that at least some of the plaintiffs are pissed off because, at some point, Yelp cancelled their accounts based on "flimsy explanations." But, that seems to work against their own arguments. If these folks were really so "exploited" by Yelp, and "forced" to write for no money... then, um, why are they so upset that they "lost" that "job"? The best the lawsuit can offer up (and I'm not joking) is that the "cult-like rewards and disciplines" associated with the gamification drove people to continue to "work" for free.
Once again, this seems like the sort of class action lawsuit that gives class action lawyers a bad name. Find a company that is making a lot of money and come up with some absolutely ridiculous reason for suing. Even in the ridiculously unlikely chance that this lawsuit goes anywhere, the only ones who will benefit are the class action lawyers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: class action, reviews, unpaid employees
Companies: yelp
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'd suggest Prenda...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/sarcmarc for those too stupid to realize
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Rikuo on Oct 28th, 2013 @ 9:24am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I got nothing.
FTFY
:P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously?
I stopped pressing the button and they stopped giving me the treat! They owe me!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
about damn time
which will, of course, then go after govt farming subsidies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: about damn time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
Here's a relevant similarity, has corporations that have already been found guilty and fined by DOJ:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/25/no_hire_pact_lawsuit_class_action/
"Crony capitalism" is one of those terms people use to try and maintain that there's also a beneficial version; what the 99% actually want is well-regulated fair markets favoring Industrial Production over Money Manipulation.
05:55:48[g-026-3]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
I'm just another mysterious corporate paid shill to debase this site but I fail at it poorly that my tactics help Techdirt's credibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
What, like copyright, Comrade Blueski?
It also is used to empower the capitalist running dogs of the imperialist elite by taking money from the poor in the names of artists who never receive it, da?
What is this "everyday good of copyright" you speak of, bearing in mind that multiple copies must be sold to garner enough royalties to engender a payout if one is due? Surely the monies go first to the corporate masters, then to the middlemen, then to the serfs, and even then, only the most popular ones tend to gain anything from it.
Ah, comrade, you know little of the real world of copyright, and your rantings are but the misplaced frustrations of a failed writer and broadcaster. It's not the pirates' fault that you never sold much, but your own, for being crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
When laws are written as "The seller shall get a rating on the asset backed securities" as apposed to, "Buyer beware", then we take responsibility for failure. Failure should punish those involved (banks) not those who aren't (taxpayers).
Crony capitalism can be result of "well-regulated" markets, depending on the regulations. Think about tennis vs. gymnastics. In tennis, it is obvious when the ball is out. The ref just enforces the clear rules. In gymnastics, the score is based on so many intangibles, so corruption is easy. Capitalism must have regulations, but they must be clear and results-based. Procedure-based regulations should be avoided at all costs. Procedure based regulations allow companies to abdicate responsibility by claiming they were following the procedures, and the results are not their fault.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
You've got a beam in your eye called copyright maximalism which you might want to remove prior to ranting about the "exploitation" of volunteer reviewers who aren't forced to write a damn thing for Yelp.
...then we can talk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reveals more of MIke's pro-corporate, anti-labor position.
01:23:45(a-678-9)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I should sue Facebook for the same thing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.yelp.com/biz/allan-j-panzer-od-pa-houston-2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting
And, his 2.5 star rating is meaningless as all his visible reviews are either 1 or 5 stars with nothing in the middle.
He is not happy with Yelp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yelp is demanding that everyone report to work tomorrow at 7AM sharp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bar grieve the lawyers
If they ain't doing that - bar grieve them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NOT Hansmeier?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come on Techdirt, join me in shedding a tear for these downtrodden employees whose job (which they volunteered for) has:
- No hours
- No responsibilities
- No boss
- No annoying customers
- No expressed or implicit promise of a salary
- etc....you get the point
Oh woe is them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or even better, people who post on forums demanding to be paid for the content the volunteered
lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would not want to be them...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
The vast majority of the reviews are written by non-wage paid writers. (Group B) The writing between A's writing and Group B's writing is indistinguishable.
All we are asking is that you, as a Yelp writer, get paid like the other 200,000 review authored postings got paid in wages. It is an easy legal matter.
Quantum meruit-Yelp demanded the reviews. You can't "volunteer" for a commercial enterprise and avoid paying taxes by getting paid in liquor, food, badges, trinkets and titles.
I would suggest that you actually read the complaint as it explains how well bottomed in the law this class action is. As for other web publishers-Yelp's right to control, control and nature of the business model makes it unique. Yelp does things, demands things and exploits workers in a far more aggressive and actionable way than other websites. As for HuffPost...those plaintiffs stated that they were "owners" for their free work. We, however merely are asking that under federal law that all workers be paid wages-not just the C.Mgrs, scouts and other writers of the 200,000 reviews ALL writers get paid for the same work. Read the complaint and thank you for making Jeremy a multimillionaire off of your labors. Did you want your small share? http://yelpclassaction.info/panzerC.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
No. It's not. You're going to lose badly. You look very very foolish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
The lawsuit seems to boil down to "Yelp is making money and we want some of it," mixed with a lot of irrelevant anecdotes about how there are people who hate Yelp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
1. Yelp pays wages to all writers. It pays wages to some writers but trinkets to other writers. Our clients want wages as per the FLSA.
2. Yelp has the right to control-therefore they are employers.
3. Yelp's business would not exist without the work of our writers. Therefore under the Nature of the Business test, our clients are employees.
4. Quantum Meruit. Yelp pays our clients in trinkets, titles, prestige. Yelp demands that our clients write more often and at a faster pace. Yelp profits from this. Equity demands that our clients get paid for their labors.
Thats as close as we can get to boiling it down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
Sure it can; here are a but a few ways:
"Lunatic"
"Sure to be dismissed on the pleadings"
"I can't believe an actual lawyer filed this thing"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
You don't understand the FLSA. At all.
2. Yelp has the right to control-therefore they are employers.
You don't understand what employer means.
3. Yelp's business would not exist without the work of our writers. Therefore under the Nature of the Business test, our clients are employees.
You don't understand the Nature of the Business test.
4. Quantum Meruit. Yelp pays our clients in trinkets, titles, prestige. Yelp demands that our clients write more often and at a faster pace. Yelp profits from this. Equity demands that our clients get paid for their labors.
Thats as close as we can get to boiling it down.
You are astoundingly clueless.
You are going to lose so badly that it's not even funny. Seriously, you look completely clueless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
I'd like to know exactly how Yelp "demanded the reviews". Usually when one party demands something of another party, the first party threatens the second in some way. If my boss tells me to do something in the workplace (and as long as it's not illegal) but I refuse to do so, she threatens me with loss of my job and hence, wages. What did you stand to lose? You weren't being paid. You didn't have set working hours. You volunteered to write reviews.
If I make a video review on Youtube, but don't sign up for ad revenue sharing, do I have the right to go back and complain when I notice the view count is in the hundreds of thousands? Same thing here. You willingly wrote a thing once, gave it to Yelp and willingly did it in exchange for what are basically e-trinkets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
"In fact, IpayTechdirt"
should be "I pay Techdirt"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
Then demand it as a condition for writing the reviews. If Yelp doesn't agree to pay you for the work, then don't do the work.
Easy legal matter.
I don't see how the reviewers have even the start of a legal leg to stand on for a lawsuit. The reviewers agreed to write the reviews without compensation. According to IRS guidelines, Yelp reviewers don't even come close to being considered employees. Yelp has not defrauded or cheated anybody in this matter. I don't see the beef here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The lawsuit is solidly based on the law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My thoughts exactly
http://www.defamationremovallaw.com/2013/10/27/class-action-lawsuit-claims-yelping-creates-employmen t-relationship/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yelpers v Yelp: The Extortionist is Now Being Extorted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spock is Logical
Does that apply to 4chan? Because they sure beat me up bad back when
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
haha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]