Uber Drivers Seek Voter Approval to Unionize in Massachusetts

Massachusetts voters are preparing to decide whether Uber and Lyft drivers can form a union and collectively negotiate their pay and working conditions, a potentially first-of-its-kind bargaining model for the US rideshare industry.

Next week’s proposal (Ballot Question 3) offers a state-supervised path to unionizing for tens of thousands of rideshare drivers in Massachusetts.

It’s the latest maneuver in a yearslong legal fight over the worker status, pay, and benefits of rideshare drivers and other gig workers.

Labor advocates say if passed the measure could inspire drivers and the unions backing them to seek similar policies in California, Minnesota, New York, and Washington, states where the gig worker fight has been especially active. It also mirrors a model of bargaining by workplace sector—unlike worksite-specific unionizing—that’s grown more common in Europe.

“This is the kind of model that’s gaining international acclaim,” said David Madland, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

Massachusetts rideshare drivers at a 2023 protest.

M. Scott Brauer / Bloomberg

Building on a Settlement

Massachusetts has more than 84,000 registered rideshare drivers, with the vast majority working for Uber Technologies Inc., Lyft Inc., or both. Both companies deem their drivers to be independent contractors instead of employees, a move that exempts them from the federally protected right to unionize and workplace laws such as minimum wage, overtime, paid sick leave, and unemployment insurance.

To settle a 2020 lawsuit by the Massachusetts attorney general over that employee classification, Lyft and Uber agreed in June to pay drivers there at least $32.50 per hour for time spent picking up and transporting passengers, plus provide paid sick time and a stipend for health insurance.

But the deal didn’t provide pay for drivers’ time spent waiting between rides or for out-of-pocket costs such as buying a car, gas, and vehicle maintenance, said Roxana Rivera, assistant to the president at 32BJ Service Employees International Union.

“The attorney general settlement was a start in setting the basic standards, but it didn’t fully address the realities faced by drivers,” she said. “It’s a huge investment on the part of the drivers to even work for these app companies.”

The ballot measure and AG settlement don’t declare drivers to be employees or independent contractors. But the measure would require a state oversight board to give a union initial recognition as the rideshare drivers’ bargaining representative based on support from 5% of the most active drivers.

Backers of the proposal gathered the 74,000-plus signatures required to get on the ballot and have spent just over $6 million under the campaign umbrella United for Justice, according to state campaign finance records. Lead supporters include 32BJ, other SEIU affiliates, and the International Association of Machinists.

Other unions, including the AFL-CIO, haven’t endorsed the proposal, pushing instead for state legislative action to give drivers employee status.

Lyft and Uber aren’t overtly campaigning against the ballot measure, but they’ve cast doubt on the need for it after drivers won pay and benefits guarantees through the AG settlement.

“We have no doubt that if drivers choose to organize, they will hold the benefits they’ve already won central to any negotiations and maintaining their flexibility will remain a top priority,” Uber spokesperson Freddi Goldstein said.

Both companies have also said they’ll urge the legislature to revise the policy next year if voters approve it—possibly delaying drivers from unionizing.

The companies have shown a willingness to spend millions fighting state-level policies that they say would hurt their business model. In 2020, they urged California voters to pass Prop 22, which cemented drivers’ status as independent contractors there. They withdrew a similar proposal from the Massachusetts ballot this year following the AG settlement.

The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance opposes the ballot proposal, saying it would raise prices for rideshare customers and let a small minority of drivers opt to unionize on behalf of all drivers statewide.

Industrywide Bargaining

A University of Massachusetts-Amherst poll from early October found 58% of voters supported the driver union proposal. But the impact of its passage has limits.

Madland, of the Center for American Progress, noted that US states can set up state-supervised bargaining only for workers who aren’t covered by the National Labor Relations Act.

“Other states could do this only for independent contractors” and other NLRA-exempt workers such as farm laborers, he said.

Seattle passed a city-run bargaining process for rideshare drivers in 2015, but faced litigation from an Uber affiliate and the US Chamber of Commerce contending it ran afoul of federal law. Seattle later withdrew the ordinance and replaced it with a driver pay law.

Opponents could challenge the Massachusetts model, but federal law allows it if enacted and supervised at the state level, said Kate Andrias, a Columbia Law School professor.

Other states have advanced variations on this idea for other industries, often via direct regulation with industry and worker input such as California’s fast-food worker council and Minnesota’s nursing home standards board.

“Those have been really effective in some states at raising standards in the industries,” Andrias said.

The measure is one of five statewide ballot proposals for Massachusetts voters to decide Tuesday. Another involves a workplace-law question requiring businesses to pay the full minimum wage to tipped employees.