[(Title)] Uber scores a big win in legal fight to keep drivers as independent contractors.

A three-judge panel ruled in favor of Uber in a long-standing lawsuit that could have a profound impact on the future of ride-sharing and the gig economy.

一个由三名法官组成的小组在一项长期诉讼中支持优步，这可能会对共享汽车的未来产生深远的影响。

The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision Tuesday reversing the class certification order in the case of O'Connor v. Uber, in which Uber drivers argued they should be categorized as employees rather than independent contractors.

美国第九巡回上诉法院周二发布了一项决定，撤销了奥康纳诉优步案的类别认证令，其中优步司机认为他们应该被归类为雇员而不是独立承包商。

The judges nullified the decision on the ground that Uber's arbitration clause prohibits class actions.

法官宣布裁决无效，理由是优步的仲裁条款禁止集体诉讼。

"We have, unfortunately, been long expecting this,"  said Shannon Liss-Riordan, an attorney representing Uber drivers in O'Connor. She cited the Ninth Circuit's previous ruling against Uber drivers, and the US Supreme Court's decision in Lewis v. Epic Systems earlier this year, in building up to this decision.  "Those two previous rulings,"  she said in an email, "removed one of our remaining arguments for why Uber should not be able to use its arbitration clause to avoid certification of a class for its widespread labor violations."

“不幸的是，我们长期以来一直期待这一点，”代表优步司机的奥康的律师Shannon Liss-Riordan说道。 她引用了第九巡回法院此前针对优步司机的判决，以及美国最高法院今年早些相似案例中作出的决定，以此作出决定。

“她之前的两项裁决，”她在一封电子邮件中说，“删除了我们剩下的一个论点，即为什么优步不应该使用其仲裁条款来避免因广泛的劳工违规行为而被认定为一类。”

The Ninth Circuit ruling impacts a consolidated appeal of 11 pending cases that essentially boil down to the same issue: should drivers be considered employees? If so, can they sue as part of a class-action lawsuit?

第九巡回法院的裁决影响了11起未决案件的联合呼吁，这些案件基本归结为同一问题：司机应被视为雇员吗？ 如果是这样，他们可以起诉作为集体诉讼的一部分吗？

With today's ruling in favor of Uber, drivers will be considered contractors — and they won't, as is currently the case, receive numerous benefits.  "We are pleased with the Court's decision,"  a spokesperson said.

由于今天的裁决有利于优步，司机将被视为承包商 - 他们不会像目前的情况那样获得许多好处。 “我们对法院的裁决感到满意，”一位发言人说。

When prospective drivers sign up with Uber, they agree to waive their right to sue in favor of arbitration, a private, quasi-legal process that generally favors corporations over individuals. Drivers can also opt of arbitration if they so choose.

当司机与优步签约时，他们同意放弃他们起诉仲裁的权利，这是一种私人的，准法律程序，通常有利于公司而不是个人。 如果他们愿意，司机也可以选择仲裁。

The main case, O'Connor, has been winding its way through the courts for over five years.

奥康纳的案件已经在法庭上绕了五年多了。

It was almost settled in 2016, when Uber agreed to pay as much as $100 million to the roughly 385,000 drivers represented in O'Connor and one other case, so long as it could continue to classify them as freelancers.

它几乎在2016年得到解决，当时优步同意向奥康纳和另外一个案件中参与的大约385,000名司机支付高达1亿美元，只要他们能继续作为自由职业者。

But the settlement was later rejected by a federal judge, who argued that the amount was insufficient.

但是该和解后来被一名联邦法官驳回，他认为金额不够。

With the loss of its class certification, drivers involved in the lawsuit are running out of options. Liss-Riordan said she is considering an en banc appeal, in which an appeals court agrees to rehear arguments.

由于失去了类别认证，参与诉讼的司机已经没有选择权。 Liss-Riordan表示，她正在考虑提起上诉，上诉法院同意重审辩论。

"In the meantime, because the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's ruling on Uber's arbitration clause,

“与此同时，因为第九巡回法院推翻了地方法院对优步仲裁条款的裁决，

we are urging all Uber drivers who want to pursue these misclassification claims to contact us immediately to sign up for individual arbitration,"  she said.  "Thousands of drivers have already signed up for individual arbitration.

我们敦促所有想要追究这些错误分类索赔的优步司机立即联系我们，报名参加个人仲裁，”她说。“成千上万的司机已经报名参加个人仲裁。

If Uber wants to resolve these disputes one by one, we are ready to do that — one by one."

如果优步想逐一解决这些纠纷，我们准备好了——一个接一个来吧。"