Gig-Working Uber and Lyft Drivers Can Unionize, Say Massachusetts Voters (reuters.com) 53
On Tuesday Massachusetts voted to become the first state to allow gig-working drivers to join labor unions, reports WBUR:
Since these gig workers are classified as independent contractors, federal law allowing employees the right to unionize does not apply to them. With the passage of this ballot initiative, Massachusetts is the first state to give ride-hailing drivers the ability to collectively bargain over working conditions.
Supporters have said the ballot measure "could provide a model for other states to let Uber and Lyft drivers unionize," reports Reuters, "and inspire efforts to organize them around the United States." Roxana Rivera, assistant to the president of 32BJ SEIU, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union, that had spearheaded a campaign to pass the proposal, said its approval shows that Massachusetts voters want drivers to have a meaningful check against the growing power of app-based companies... The Massachusetts vote was the latest front in a years-long battle in the United States over whether ride-share drivers should be considered to be independent contractors or employees entitled to benefits and wage protections. Studies have shown that using contractors can cost companies as much as 30% less than employees.
Drivers for Uber and Lyft, including approximately 70,000 in Massachusetts, do not have the right to organize under the National Labor Relations Act... Under the Massachusetts measure, drivers can form a union after collecting signatures from at least 25% of active drivers in Massachusetts, and companies can form associations to allow them to jointly negotiate with the union during state-supervised talks.
But the Boston Globe points out that the measure " divided labor advocates in Massachusetts, some of whom worry it would in fact be a step backward in the lengthy fight to boost the rights of gig workers." Those concerns led the state's largest labor organization, the AFL-CIO, to remain neutral. But two unions backing the effort, the SEIU 32BJ and the International Association of Machinists, say allowing drivers to unionize, even if not as full employees, will help provide urgently needed worker protections and better pay and safety standards.
Supporters have said the ballot measure "could provide a model for other states to let Uber and Lyft drivers unionize," reports Reuters, "and inspire efforts to organize them around the United States." Roxana Rivera, assistant to the president of 32BJ SEIU, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union, that had spearheaded a campaign to pass the proposal, said its approval shows that Massachusetts voters want drivers to have a meaningful check against the growing power of app-based companies... The Massachusetts vote was the latest front in a years-long battle in the United States over whether ride-share drivers should be considered to be independent contractors or employees entitled to benefits and wage protections. Studies have shown that using contractors can cost companies as much as 30% less than employees.
Drivers for Uber and Lyft, including approximately 70,000 in Massachusetts, do not have the right to organize under the National Labor Relations Act... Under the Massachusetts measure, drivers can form a union after collecting signatures from at least 25% of active drivers in Massachusetts, and companies can form associations to allow them to jointly negotiate with the union during state-supervised talks.
But the Boston Globe points out that the measure " divided labor advocates in Massachusetts, some of whom worry it would in fact be a step backward in the lengthy fight to boost the rights of gig workers." Those concerns led the state's largest labor organization, the AFL-CIO, to remain neutral. But two unions backing the effort, the SEIU 32BJ and the International Association of Machinists, say allowing drivers to unionize, even if not as full employees, will help provide urgently needed worker protections and better pay and safety standards.
Since when (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Since when (Score:4, Insightful)
In general, in the United States, labor unions are expected to follow Federal regulations regarding organization and bargaining. In this case, there are no Federal regulations covering gig workers.
Re: Since when (Score:2)
So hasn't the US ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87) [ohchr.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure that doesn't cover gig workers. At least the topic summary seems to indicate that.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no exclusion in the convention and it covers both workers and employers.
So if the gig workers are classed as employers of themselves then they can organize as well.
Re: Since when (Score:5, Informative)
To answer your question, no the US never ratified that UN convention, and anyway UN conventions have no teeth.
https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/no... [ilo.org]
For your second point, the core issue is that gig workers aren't employees, they're independant contractors.
Uber/Lyft has distorted that definition to the point of parody because the contract in theory only lasts for the duration of a 3 minute car trip .. but here we are.
Re: (Score:3)
The contract is on a per job basis which is quite common for other fields.
I pay my exterminator every month to change rat bait, clean out wasp nests and spray for nasties every month. But he's not my employee. He's a contractor. He works on a per event basis.
I have no problem if gig workers want to form a union but it's not going to do a god damned thing for them. Anyone can open the driver app and start driving after some basic paperwork is completed. What are they going to do? Organize a strike of z
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
does a worker need permission of the state to join a labor union? Are we working on Chinese labor law over here?
Since you want the state to smile upon your little protection racket.
No, you don't need permission from the state to have a little club that means nothing.
But if you want the state to look away while you wield a club against "scabs", then you need the state to recognize you as an actual union.
Re: (Score:2)
In theory I would like the idea of letting the labor market work itself out, but when only 2 companies completely dominate this industry nationally, how much of a labor "market" is that really?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
does a worker need permission of the state to join a labor union? Are we working on Chinese labor law over here?
It’s a good question. But there’s a bit more to the story than simply asking permission. Labor law in the U.S. is complex and, in many states, heavily tilted against unionization efforts. Since federal protections for unions only apply to employees (not independent contractors like Uber and Lyft drivers), gig workers have essentially fallen through the cracks until Massachusetts passed this measure.
Here's some context: Most US states follow an "at will" doctrine, which means that, generally, e
NWTA? (Score:2)
Are they going to join the NWTA? Does anyone know how that union functions?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.nwta-union.org/ [nwta-union.org]
The Niagara Wheatfield Teacher's Association?
Re: (Score:2)
Oops it's the NYTWA. It's a relatively new union, and despite its name it's apparently gone national (or is trying to).
I don't think it'll last (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Massachusetts voted to become the first state to allow gig-working drivers to join labor unions
with how the election went the fed will step in and shut it down.
Democracy giveth, and democracy taketh away.
Rage! Rage against...something.
Re: (Score:2)
Then they'll need to change the bill of rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy giveth, and democracy taketh away.
Rage! Rage against...something.
Democracy given, democracy gone.
Not much of a democracy when our representatives represent the interests of the rich and powerful
clearly this isn't a democracy, this is a plutocracy
greed and corrupt rule our roost
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah fuck democracy when over half the voters choose something after a year long process!
We need to save democracy by choosing the candidates in dark smokey rooms. The voters are too dumb to make these decisions for themselves! Letting people vote is anti-democratic!
Is that what you meant to say?
Re: (Score:3)
Clearly it doesn't matter who we vote for when our 'representatives' are corrupted and co-opted by undue influences, as a result, we need to enforce direct democracy over representative democracy
the reasons are scale and technology, for the first time we can use technology to scale up direct democracy so we don't need representatives who can be corrupted, we can let people vote directly for everything that affects them personally
now, mind you, I don't think this will produce better, perfect and or more info
Re: (Score:2)
i'd defund politics too, that'd get rid of all the greedy selfish scoundrels
Re: (Score:1)
That's the right answer. I fully agree. There is absolutely a huge problem when people who never had a real job, spent their entire life in politics, retire out with tens or sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars. It's fucking nuts.
But saying voters are stupid or racist or whatever and therefore elect the "wrong" people and thus democracy is bad is just dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol, instantly modded down by someone who thinks ultra rich politicians is healthy for the country.
What does the union bring to the table? (Score:1)
I'd be a lot more supportive of unions if they brought some actual value to the table beyond coercion. Handling training, provide a more stable driver pool, pensions, driver insurance, group car maintenance contracts, something, anything to make working with a union something you'd choose without having a gun to your head.
As it is, unions do nothing but strong arm employers and force drivers to be represented. I'm not a huge fan of monopolies and bullies. I don't like it when companies are bullies, I don't
paid for waiting time, paid for return miles and t (Score:1)
paid for waiting time, paid for return miles and tolls to get back to your core area.
maybe you should be paid for the time waiting in the airport que
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, so you have bought into the myth that Uber, Lyft et al are ride sharing companies, when they in fact operates as taxi companies.
When a sizeable portion of your workforce in the gig economy are working full time for you, and almost exclusively for you, that is no longer a "gig".
These companies are just using the excuse of "gig-economy", to skirt the law, increase their own profits while footing the bill to those unfortunate enough to be forced to accept their terms. Thank you for encouraging the race to
Re: (Score:3)
Ah, so you have bought into the myth that Uber, Lyft et al are ride sharing companies, when they in fact operates as taxi companies.
When a sizeable portion of your workforce in the gig economy are working full time for you, and almost exclusively for you, that is no longer a "gig".
These companies are just using the excuse of "gig-economy", to skirt the law, increase their own profits while footing the bill to those unfortunate enough to be forced to accept their terms. Thank you for encouraging the race to the bottom.
You're almost right, except that: they are no longer skirting the law, and they are not taxi drivers. Originally they were unlicensed limo drivers -- illegal in every state. After operating illegally for a while, the states invented a new category of "transport
network company" drivers to make it legal. However, they are still not taxi drivers: they cannot pick up a street hail. All rides are by reservation, like a limo. It's just that it's really easy to get a reservation for "right now, please".
Are there a
Re: (Score:2)
When a sizeable portion of your workforce in the gig economy are working full time for you, and almost exclusively for you, that is no longer a "gig".
The vast majority of Uber and Lyft drivers work part time to supplement their earnings. The quick searching I did says only about 5-15% of drivers try to work full time. Calling them gig companies is still pretty accurate because that's how most drivers interact with them.
The term "sharing" is a bit inappropriate. Sharing, to me, implies an absence of a profit motive. Ride sharing drivers clearly expect to be compensated for sharing their vehicles. "Ride hiring" companies might be more accurate. But the rea
Re: (Score:2)
now tolls and airport / city fees are not set by Uber and Lyft
Re:What does the union bring to the table? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not a fan of bullies, but you're ok when companies bully employees?
"...I don't like it when companies are bullies...."
Tell me you didn't read my whole post without telling me you didn't read my whole post.
Re: (Score:2)
Many unions do bring value to the table. That being said, charging more for the same product is commonplace in many American markets, so it shouldn't surprise you to see the same behavior from labor unions.
Re: What does the union bring to the table? (Score:2)
You're complaining that unions strong arm companies, when the only reason they exist at all is to stop companies from strong arming employees.
Re: (Score:2)
You're complaining that unions strong arm companies, when the only reason they exist at all is to stop companies from strong arming employees.
Yeah. I'm not a huge fan of either. The difference is, employees can vote with their feet. Employers don't have that option.
Re:What does the union bring to the table? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd be a lot more supportive of unions if they brought some actual value to the table beyond coercion. Handling training, provide a more stable driver pool, pensions, driver insurance, group car maintenance contracts, something, anything to make working with a union something you'd choose without having a gun to your head.
As it is, unions do nothing but strong arm employers and force drivers to be represented. I'm not a huge fan of monopolies and bullies. I don't like it when companies are bullies, I don't like it from governments, and I don't like it from unions.
The reality is most of the rights we enjoy are the results of unions or people trying to organize. The problem is unions, it's the fact that Big Unions are corrupt, just like Big Business.Rich people take over and use these organizations to cheat and steal from those beneath them.
Classism and corruption are the real problems, not unions, not governments nor even business. Our real problem is unethical rich and powerful people who are above our laws. Corruption kills societies.
Their greed is our undoing.
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is most of the rights we enjoy are the results of unions or people trying to organize.
So that's interesting. I don't think that's as true as we're lead to believe in school. Many of the benefits we attribute to unionization were already happening without unions. For example, the 40 hour work week: people were already working an average of 40-ish hours a week when that became mandated. Child labor? Also going out of fashion before labor laws and unions came about. Factory safety? Injuries and deaths on the job started falling in the late 19th century and have been falling ever since. Unions m
Re: (Score:2)
So that's interesting. I don't think that's as true as we're lead to believe in school. Many of the benefits we attribute to unionization were already happening without unions. For example, the 40 hour work week: people were already working an average of 40-ish hours a week when that became mandated. Child labor? Also going out of fashion before labor laws and unions came about. Factory safety? Injuries and deaths on the job started falling in the late 19th century and have been falling ever since. Unions may have sped the process some but we'd have all those things today even without unions.
The problem is unions, it's the fact that Big Unions are corrupt, just like Big Business.Rich people take over and use these organizations to cheat and steal from those beneath them.
I agree, that's what gave unions a bad name. I don't know how much outright bribery, graft, and theft happens today. I do think there also exists an incestuous relationship between governments and government employee unions which rankles.
Here's the thing. Union membership peaked around the 40s. It's been declining as a portion of the workforce ever since. You have to wonder what caused the last three generations of workers to decide unionization wasn't as important as in the past. Whatever good unions did in the 20s to 50s seems to not matter so much any more, otherwise we'd see unionization drives succeed much more often than they do.
what a bunch of crap
what gave unions a bad name is all the rich people who resent that poor people organized against them
greedy selfish powerful rich people are the problem, not the poor and powerless
here we have it once again a pseudo-conservative argument for economic injustice
shame on you
Re: (Score:2)
Hiring Halls (Score:2)
In some industries, most jobs are filled through referrals from union hiring halls.
Employers in the construction and maritime industries often choose to hire exclusively through referrals from union hiring halls. Unions that operate exclusive hiring halls must notify workers how the referral system works (and of any changes in that system) and maintain non-discriminatory standards and procedures in making job referrals from the hiring hall. You don't have to be a union member to use a hiring hall and a unio
Why do they need permission? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Benefit number one would generally be not getting immediately fired for dating to join a union.
Without the protection of law, the business can ignore the union or just fire anybody who joins.
Just because somebody wants to associate with a union doesn't mean the business has to.
That is where I think smoot123 has a bit of a point. Have the union be a bit more like a trade guild, where they provide services to the members that the business doesn't provide. Obvious targets might be (in the USA) Healthcare, ret
They'll just withdraw (Score:3)
Sadly the way this may play out is the same as it does anywhere else.
They'll just withdraw the service from the state.
This of course being long after they'd decimated the market for actual taxis.
Re: (Score:3)
A taxi service can spring from nothing very quickly. If Uber, Lyft, and their ilk decimate taxi service and then leave, a new service will spring up before the week is out.
Brought to you (Score:1)
Positive or Negative (Score:3)
What were they doing being ionized in the first place.
Gee (Score:2)
I thought none of them were "workers" actually "employed" by the companies (Uber, Lyft, et al).....