The city of Seattle passed a law Monday that would grant Uber and Lyft drivers the right to form labor unions, a bold regulatory maneuver that could test the labor model behind the popular ride-hailing apps.
The measure passed the Seattle City Council in an 8-0 vote, and the city’s Democratic mayor still needs to sign it. But the law will almost certainly face a legal challenge and could be tied up in court for years.
Like a lot of other companies in the so-called gig economy, Uber and Lyft classify their drivers as independent contractors, rather than employees. Under federal law, independent contractors do not have the right to band together and bargain collectively over wages and working conditions the way employees can.
That’s where Seattle’s city council has stepped in. Under the bill passed Monday, “for-hire drivers” would be legally entitled to seek out “exclusive driver representatives” for the purpose of collective bargaining — i.e., labor unions. If a majority of drivers at a particular company designate a union as their representative, then by law the company will have to bargain with the union within the city of Seattle.
The law has implications well beyond Uber and Lyft. Many traditional taxi drivers are classified as independent contractors as well, and would have new rights under the law.
“The Seattle law is intended to give collective bargaining rights to those who are independent contractors,” Liebman said. “To that extent, there’s no preemption problem.”
If the labor law argument doesn’t hold, the industry could still fight the legislation with antitrust law. Under that scenario, Uber and others may argue that drivers banding together as independent contractors — and presumably raising the cost of their labor — amounts to illegal price-fixing.
Full content: The Journal Observer
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Meta Begins Defense After FTC Concludes Case in Landmark Antitrust Trial
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Data Bill Still No Closer to Passage As Parliamentary ‘Ping-Pong’ Drags On
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Awarded $271.2M in Damages Against Amgen
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Chair Proposes 15% Staff Reduction Amid Budget Constraints
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Urges Antitrust Watchdog to Prioritize Growth and Clarity in Business Regulation
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Healthcare Antitrust
May 14, 2025 by
CPI
Healthcare & Antitrust: What to Expect in the New Trump Administration
May 14, 2025 by
Nana Wilberforce, John W O'Toole & Sarah Pugh
Patent Gaming and Disparagement: Commission Fines Teva For Improperly Protecting Its Blockbuster Medicine
May 14, 2025 by
Blaž Višnar, Boris Andrejaš, Apostolos Baltzopoulos, Rieke Kaup, Laura Nistor & Gianluca Vassallo
Strategic Alliances in the Pharma Sector: An EU Competition Law Perspective
May 14, 2025 by
Christian Ritz & Benedikt Weiss
Monopsony Power in the Hospital Labor Market
May 14, 2025 by
Kevin E. Pflum & Christian Salas