Uber, Lyft Drivers Can Unionize in Seattle

Seattle has passed a measure allowing drivers of smartphone-based taxi companies like Uber and Lyft to unionize over pay and other working conditions, the first move of its kind in the United States.

The ordinance would require the company to hammer out an agreement with the representative organization.

The Seattle City Council voted 8-0 in favor of the legislation proposed by Councilmember Mike O’Brien.

The National Labor Relations Act already gives employees the right to bargain as a union.

Uber and Lyft drivers are now able to unionize in Seattle. The decision was met with much joy from drivers for the ridesharing companies, but not from the city’s mayor, Ed Murray, who says he will refuse to sign the law.

Saad Melouchi, who drives for Uber, burst into cheers and hugged others outside City Council chambers after the vote. As this ordinance takes effect, my administration will begin its work to determine what it will take to implement the law. The measure would not convert drivers into employees except for this limited objective – a strategy originally developed by unions representing home health aides and child-care providers.

The vote is seen as a victory for the App-Based Drivers Association, or ABDA.

Uber has roughly 400,000 drivers nationwide, including 10,000 in Seattle, according to the Associated Press. He promoted it as a way to give drivers a say in their working conditions. “I’m so happy for myself and for other drivers”.

“We now have a US$60bil (RM259.45bil) organisation making a lot of money while some drivers are making less than US$3 (RM13) per hour”, he said. The companies strongly oppose it and are expected to challenge it in court. And while Uber and Lyft are the ones most will recognize, this ordinance also applies to all for-hire transportation network companies and taxis.

“Uber is creating new opportunities for many people to earn a better living on their own time and their own terms”, the company said in a statement. A spokesperson for the company told NYT that if the ordinance passed the ruling would threaten “the privacy of drivers, impose costs on passengers”, reminding that the city law conflicts with federal law.