Posted on 09/23/2015 6:49:12 PM PDT by markomalley
The Seattle City Council began considering a bill Wednesday it claims will help give Uber and Lyft drivers a voice, but which critics say is nothing more than a giveaway to unions.
Democratic Councilman Mike O’Brien introduced the bill, which would impact contract drivers for Uber, Lyft and any other ride-sharing company. The goal, its supporters say, is to give the drivers more of a voice by allowing drivers to collectively negotiate.
“The majority of drivers for hire come from historically disadvantaged communities,” the city council noted in an issue page on its website. “Unfortunately, they are often taken advantage of by the companies that hire them or contract with them.”
Advances in digital technologies have allowed companies like Lyft and Uber to use contracting in unique ways. Companies make digital platforms where individuals can create their own business ventures, in what is known as the sharing economy.
But the sharing economy has been the subject of criticism, in part because it’s relatively unregulated and allegedly unfair to workers. Democratic presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have condemned the model, and officials at the Department of Labor have spoken out against it. Unions have been some of the more adamant rivals of the model.
O’Brien has several connections to the labor movement. According to his campaign website, most of the groups that endorsed him were unions. And one of his legislative aides is a former community organizer for the union UNITE HERE Local 8.
Contracting as a whole makes it more difficult for unions to organize workers, because unions have to pursue one contractor at a time, as opposed to all employees within a single workplace.
Though contractors can join a union, it’s much easier to unionize employees because consent doesn’t have to be unanimous. A union only has to get the majority of employees within a single bargaining unit to agree to representation, in order to become the Exclusive Representative of all the employees.
And if the union becomes the Exclusive Representative of all of the employees in a mandatory dues state, all the employees within that bargaining unit must pay union dues or fees, whether they agree with the union or not.
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTW) argues the Seattle City Council is proposing the change not to give employees a voice, but to make it easier for unions to organize them.
“Acting at the behest of union officials, the Seattle City Council is targeting independent drivers, such as those who contract with Uber and Lyft, for mandatory unionization and the seizure of compulsory union fees,” NRTW said in a press release. “The legality of Seattle’s imminent attempt to foist compulsory unionization on independent drivers is highly suspect and may be susceptible to legal challenge.”
The bill, NRTW notes, could undermine the ride-sharing model in several ways. It would require independent drivers to turn over personal information to union officials, and it would allow exclusive union representation of independent drivers. The bill would also authorize union officials to make agreements with companies that require drivers to be unionized as a condition of employment.
Aren’t they independent contractors?
Yes... by law they most certainly are. “Abandon all Hope Oh Ye Who Enter Seattle”
The MOB doesn’t like the competition and the politicians hate to miss the bribes.
SEIU licking their chops....
Do the drivers have guns to their heads and are they chained to the steering wheel?
Uber and Lyft would single-handedly make taxi medallions worthless after a time and the cities can’t let that happen.
the racket must be protected at all costs.
As you probably know, Uber has the secret nuclear weapon of lobbying, they hired Plouffy as a VP.
What is uber but an app for gypsy cabs?
Uber is just an app for gypsy cabs.
You and I know that, but apparently the pump and dump crowd is in love.
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/uber-is-now-worth-50-billion-stocks-in-the-news-cm504483
After 45 years, I left Seattle a little over four years ago for my paradise in central Kentucky.
Every six months or so, Seattle makes the news with a story like this, vindicating me, yet again. How’s that “big dig west” going, BTW?
Uber and Lyft drivers have a voice in that they can stop accepting rides at any time. Uber and Lyft must balance customer and driver needs in order to keep both happy.
A friend of mine in Seattle owned a business where they hired contractors as interpreters for courtrooms. The state decided one day that their contractors were “employees” and threatened them with MASSIVE and live destroying fines if they didn’t “turn in” some of the folks that did similar stuff. It was like the McCarthyism myths, only real. It was “turn in” folks or lose everything.
The corruption is disgusting.
a “liberal” paradise
This is very much like the Unions taking dues out of day care workers and people taking care of their relatives as primary care givers here in Michigan without their permission. That got stopped. I am not so sure they can stop it in that neck of the woods...
If Seattle forces Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize, will they also force the union to buy their cars for them?
Uber has market cap of around 50 billion, and is spending money on self driving cars. Progressives are on the wrong side of history.
A lot of the drivers are foreigners. You know if you try to rob a foreign run mini-mart the chances are good you won't walk away. Wait until these foreign born taxi drivers start feeling like they are being robbed by uber drivers.
And in a week, there’s a new rival app for the same service not listed in the law.
Kudos to the astute Freeper above who pointed out that Uber is really nothing more than an app for gypsy cabs. Wait until they have to compete with a Chinese company that develops an app for gypsy cabs driven by illegal aliens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.