2017 class-action lawsuit for misclassifying workers In 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against DoorDash for allegedly misclassifying delivery drivers in California and Massachusetts as independent contractors. In 2022, a tentative settlement was reached in which DoorDash would pay $100 million total, with $61 million going to over 900,000 drivers, paying out just over $130 per driver, and $28 million for the lawyers. Gizmodo criticized the settlement, noting that the $413 million that DoorDash CEO Tony Xu received the previous year was one of the largest CEO compensation packages of all time.
2019 data breach lawsuit On May 4, 2019, DoorDash confirmed 4.9 million customers, delivery workers and merchants had sensitive information stolen via a
data breach. Those who joined the platform after April 5, 2018, were unaffected by the breach. A class-action lawsuit for the breach was filed against DoorDash in October 2019.
Withholding of tips and subsequent class-action lawsuits In July 2019, the company's tipping policy was criticized by
The New York Times, and later
The Verge and
Vox and
Gothamist. Drivers receive a guaranteed minimum per order that is paid by DoorDash by default. When a customer added a
tip, instead of going directly to the driver, it first went to the company to cover the guaranteed minimum. Drivers then only directly received the part of the tip that exceeded the guaranteed minimum per order. In January 2020, it was reported that DoorDash had lied about skimming tips from its drivers, causing them to earn an average of $1.45 an hour after expenses, and that after the company had allegedly overhauled its tipping system, DoorDash was still manipulating per-delivery payouts at the expense of drivers. A DoorDash customer filed a
class action lawsuit against the company for its "materially false and misleading" tipping policy. Under pressure, the company revised its policy. The company settled a lawsuit with
District of Columbia Attorney General
Karl Racine for $2.5million, with funds going to deliverers, the government, and to charity.
2021 driver strike for tip transparency In July 2021, DoorDash drivers went on strike to protest lack of tip transparency and to ask for higher pay. At the time of the strike, and, as of June 2022, DoorDash did not allow drivers to see the full tip amounts prior to accepting a delivery in the app. If customers tip over a set amount for the order total, Doordash hides a portion of the tip until the delivery is complete. The strike occurred after DoorDash rewrote its code to cut off access to Para, a third-party app that drivers had been using to see the full tip amounts.
2020 antitrust litigation In April 2020, in the case of
Davitashvili v. GrubHub Inc. DoorDash,
Grubhub,
Postmates, and
Uber Eats were accused of monopolistic power by only listing restaurants on its apps if the restaurant owners signed contracts which include clauses that require prices be the same for dine-in customers as for customers receiving delivery. The plaintiffs stated that this arrangement increases the cost for dine-in customers, as they are required to subsidize the cost of delivery; and that the apps charge "exorbitant" fees, which range from 13% to 40% of revenue, while the average restaurant's profit ranges from 3% to 9% of revenue. The lawsuit seeks
treble damages, including for overcharges, since April 14, 2016, for dine-in and delivery customers in the United States at restaurants using the defendants’ delivery apps. Although several preliminary documents in the case have now been filed, a trial date has not yet been set.
Litigation for illegal unauthorized restaurant listing In May 2021, DoorDash was criticized for unauthorized listings of restaurants who had not given permission to appear on the app. The company was sued by Lona's Lil Eats in St. Louis, with the lawsuit claiming that DoorDash had listed them without permission, then prevented any orders to the restaurant from going through and redirecting customers to other restaurants instead, because Lona's was "too far away," when in reality it had not paid DoorDash a fee for listing. This aspect of DoorDash's business practice is illegal in California. DoorDash and GrubHub denied the suit's merits.
2023 lawsuit by the city of Seattle In August 2023, DoorDash was obligated to pay its drivers and the city of Seattle a total of $1.6 million. It was found that the platform made it difficult for users to request paid time off. DoorDash is to pay $1.1 million towards safe and sick time credits, $500k directly to drivers and an additional $8,500 in city fees.
2024 privacy lawsuit by the state of California In February 2024, after being found to have illegally sold personal data, DoorDash was obligated to pay a $375,000 civil penalty as well as to begin complying with privacy laws it had been shirking, namely CCPA and CalOPPA. == Markets ==