Consumer advocacy group Consumer Watchdog has reached out to Uber’s CEO and board to highlight potential conflicts of interest concerning the company’s top policy executive in the Western region, Ramona Prieto. The organization is urging Uber to inform shareholders about Prieto’s connections that could financially benefit her household, particularly as the company is pursuing a controversial ballot measure intended to limit medical recovery and contingency fee representation in auto accident cases.
In a letter sent to Uber’s leadership, Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, questioned why Uber, a financially robust company, would engage in a campaign against a system designed to aid injury victims and others with limited means. He pointed to a potential conflict of interest involving Prieto, who is engaged to Juan Rodriguez, a partner at Bearstar Strategies. Rodriguez’s firm is reportedly involved in the campaign to promote the ballot initiative, raising concerns about whether Prieto’s actions serve Uber’s interests or her personal financial aspirations.
Court emphasized in his letter that Prieto’s association with Rodriguez meets criteria under SEC Regulation S-K, Item 404(a), which encompasses related-party transactions that require disclosure. He expressed concern that her decision to collaborate with certain consultants might not only serve her household’s financial interests but also entangle Uber in contentious political issues currently being scrutinized in federal court.
Adding to the concerns, a recent investigation by the Los Angeles Times revealed that Prieto had engaged with California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, who is under investigation for ethics violations, in efforts to garner support for legislation aimed at reducing uninsured motorist coverage requirements for Uber. Prior to this meeting, Uber made a $25,000 donation to an organization linked to Lara, further complicating the landscape of influence surrounding the proposed legislative changes.
Furthermore, the letter pointed out that Uber’s head of legal compliance, Tony West, shares a prior connection with Rodriguez, which raises questions regarding the impartiality of the legal advice Uber receives on disclosing potential conflicts of interest.
As the narrative unfolds, the implications of these relationships and actions highlight the complex intersection of corporate governance, ethics, and public policy—issues that could significantly affect Uber’s operations and its reputation in the eyes of consumers and investors alike.