Seattle Will Allow Uber and Lyft Drivers to Form Unions
Source: New York Times
SEATTLE Seattles city council voted unanimously to approve a bill allowing drivers for Uber, Lyft and other ride-hailing apps to form unions.
The passage of the ordinance, the first legislation of its kind in the country, was greeted with cheers in a city council chamber packed with supporters holding placards that read Driver Unity.
The vote is a victory for the App-Based Drivers Association, or ABDA, of Seattle, an organization of on-demand contract workers that lobbied with the local Teamsters union for the legislation. It is a fight that other drivers around the country have watched closely; union organizers in California have said that the outcome of the Seattle vote could influence actions taken in their own cities.
The ordinance is also the latest headache for Uber, which is embroiled in battles about employment issues across the country. The company faces a class-action lawsuit in California on behalf of some drivers who wish to be considered full-time employees, not contractors. Uber has consistently resisted that effort, underscoring the flexibility its service affords those who drive for the company.
In a statement after the vote, a spokeswoman for Lyft said that the ordinance passed would threaten the privacy of drivers, impose costs on passengers and the city and conflict with federal law.
...
For those pushing for unionization, the battle is far from won. Legal experts said the measure could run afoul of federal labor laws. Groups of independent contractors engaging in collective bargaining could also run up against illegal price-fixing issues under antitrust law.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/15/technology/seattle-clears-the-way-for-uber-drivers-to-form-a-union.html
This decision (as it works it's way (likely) to the Supreme Court) has a major effect on hiring practices and the viability of many of these new "disruptive" moves to a "gig economy".
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)olddad56
(5,732 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I will never use Uber.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)I am big on start up small companies. Those big cab companies are to wealthy and were a monopoly which I hate even more.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Opinions may vary.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)They don't have to pay for those overpriced madallions and can do pretty well. My customers who pick me up love the flexibility and the money they make.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I support workers.
You can keep low wage corporations.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Your post are all opinion without direct facts.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Driving a cab has always been a low paying job with dispatching companies skimming off the top.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Uber and Walmart are different only in the size.
Their drivers should unionize, and demand decent wages and benefits.
I support workers, not corporations.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)That was my point.
Obviously labor organization and negotiation for better pay and benefits are preferred, but are you under the impression you get that with other cab companies?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Uber uses a business model designed so they don't have to do that.
I support workers right to unionize, not multibillion dollar corporations, ever.
This is about unions rights nor corporate rights.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Most cab companies treat drives as private contractors and pay no benefits and many of those are going through the same legal battles as Uber right now. Unless you did extensive research on how each company operates, you would have no way of knowing whether your driver was getting benefits or not and you can be pretty much certain they aren't unionized as very few are.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)...in NYC all cab, Uber and Lyft drivers are independent contractors.
Tab
(11,093 posts)that the traditional drivers are locked into a system where they HAVE to use an agency, which likely owns the (usually pricey and hard to get) medallions. Uber allows anyone to drive, no medallians or tax overhead (for Uber). People want a level playing field, whether it's independent or agency, but not quite this disparate difference.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Most cab companies furnish the cars that drivers use, and I'm sure skim even more off the top for that. At least with Uber the drivers have the option of driving for some other service. Ideally all of these people should be employees with benefits, and if they were unionized it would be even better. I just don't know that boycotting Uber really helps anyone when there's not much in the way of an alternative.
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)seemingly being anti-union.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251417437
Sanders would support the workers 100%.
What's up?
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)He is talking about supporting the drivers, because of his personal experience talking with them and listening to them. He uses Uber, so he is being very supportive of them. Every ride is money in their pockets.
And why would you post a link to something he said earlier that has nothing to do with unions or the issue being discussed?
Kind creepy.
What's up with you?
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)He is talking about supporting the company, BTW. Read the posts please.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)...that you disagreeing with him meant that you would accuse him of being anti-union, then chide him about being a Bernie supporter, and then post a link back to one of his Bernie-supportive posts.
The whole thing kinda had a stalkerish feel to it.
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)And BTW, I am allowed to reply to posts and it's really none of your business. If you think I am stalking: A. Do a search. B. Notify admins.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)The new Democracy will come in our workplaces!
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Have to beg for permission from their owners to work. They only get wages, and profits go to someone not even paying taxes where they send their kids to school. Uber and lyft didn't want it, but that has nothing to do with anything but profit and permission, nothing toward ownership and real control.
Now they can choose from the choices their owners - who don't do the work - deign to give them. Seems more condescending than democratic.
Uber alone is estimate to be worth $62.5 billion. How much of that do the drivers have?
Respectfully, and it's not just you, but I am astounded at how dilute the definition of democratic workplaces has become, and especially cooperative. Prior to 1925, when people really were fighting and dying for control, they saw association with business unions as quitting, and business spent a lot of money (billions in today's dollars) to make sure everyone thought the same thing. It appears they invested well.
As loose as things are getting I might have to start thinking of our ex-pres shrub as a motivational speaker.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)tptb do, phoney up everything real, so people become confused and doubt their own higher selves. That way they can maintain their control over the masses. They really are quite insidious and insane.
Still through all that, we awaken one at a time until a tsunami of sanity returns.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)simply by deciding not to take their car out that day?
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)So it would be about as much of a strike as telling your boss you ate some bad tacos and can't stop shitting.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)Is the assumption that you can't drive without joining the Union?
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Federal law does not recognize the rights of independent contractors to form unions.
Federal law would need to be changed.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)If a bunch of Uber drivers call themselves a "union" and tell Uber that they will stop being Uber drivers unless Uber increases fares, is Uber going to change anything? Presumably Uber needs to keep fares at a level that is going to induce drivers to continue driving for them, unions or no unions.
Tab
(11,093 posts)Drivers could boycott, but there's certainly plenty of people willing to undercut them (if only a former taxi driver). The quality, and ubiquitness, of Uber might suffer though.
A more interesting scenario is that Uber has competitors (e.g.: Lyft). They're playing catch-up. It could be a very interesting development if Lyft recognized their drivers as employees, and getting them to shift over.
The only snag I can find in this scenario is if they consider drivers as employers, are they now subject to livery rules and have to have a medallion? I assume that varies by locale. And, to extend the snag, if they are employees but DON'T need to get medallions, that doesn't seem fair to current taxi employees who do have those requirements.
And just to stretch it out more slightly with another question - let's take NYC (the only place I have a rough idea of how this works) - medallions are too expensive for individual drivers, so I believe taxi companies take them out, equip cars, and bring in drivers. Are THOSE drivers considered employees, or are they 1099's (Independent Contractors)? I do know they need a livery (taxi driver) license individually, but I don't know what that costs. I'd like to think it wasn't a prohibitive amount.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)as in, when you literally wave your arm on the street and make eye contact with the driver. When taxis are called by phone (as in livery companies) or by an app (like Uber) no medallion is needed.
Queens Supreme Court Justice Allan Weiss ruled that e-hails (or "app-dispatched calls" in official TLC terminology) are in fact distinct from physical hails, and therefore legal. Passenger communications to Uber-type companies via a smartphone are not street hails, which are requests made by passengers standing on the street who gesture or make an utterance," she wrote in her decision.
http://gothamist.com/2015/09/10/uber_ehail_ruling.php
Tab
(11,093 posts)Now I know that, at least in my state, and I think the next one down, limousine drivers (which I assume is the closest parallel, situation-wise) have specific livery plates. Do you know what the distinction/rules is with them? Is getting a livery plate just a tax thing, or does it confer other powers?
malthaussen
(17,216 posts)That the courts should have any say in the free association of workers is fundamentally wrong.
-- Mal
l.o.o.s.e.e-2
(53 posts)First heard about this when Uber's CEO was interviewed on Colbert's TV show: seems their ultimate plan involves "self-drivers": http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/22/uber-self-driving-car-pittsburgh and http://time.com/132124/uber-self-driving-cars/
Tab
(11,093 posts)Self driving is good, but it's still better not being in the city (highway-restricted). This is the ultimate game-changer, but the timeline is far enough out that the other situations still need to be resolved.