Para leer este artículo en español, haz clic aquí.
In Massachusetts, Question 3 on the November ballot asks voters to decide whether or not Uber and Lyft drivers can form unions.
These rideshare drivers are currently not able to unionize because they’re considered independent contractors, not employees, by the National Labor Relations Act.
NEPM’s Kari Njiri asked reporter Nirvani Williams about the arguments for and against Question 3.
Nirvani Williams, NEPM: Uber and Lyft drivers can’t form unions or collectively bargain for benefits, better working conditions or wages with either company. But the approach to Question 3 would allow rideshare drivers to unionize as independent contractors through an idea called sector-based bargaining. It’s a type of bargaining that would allow drivers across multiple companies to negotiate together for better pay and other protections that would then apply to the entire rideshare industry.
Kari Njiri, NEPM: So, what are supporters of a “yes” vote saying?
I spoke with a lawyer who helped write the ballot initiative. She says since federal law designates rideshare drivers as independent contractors, they’re approaching unionization on a state level.
And, it’s important to note, Massachusetts has been in litigation with Uber and Lyft about driver rights for years. State Attorney General Andrea Campbell reached a settlement with the companies this summer, which guarantees that drivers will have an hourly wage, health insurance subsidies, paid sick and family leave, and workers’ comp insurance.
Roxana Rivera is a driver union organizer and said the settlement was a start, but she says it "didn't go far enough."
“It didn't address fully the reality faced by rideshare drivers in this industry. It didn't account for all the out-of-pocket costs folks actually have to, you know, pay for their vehicle. And some drivers have gone into debt because of that,” Rivera said.
And what are rideshare drivers themselves telling you about this initiative?
Well, many gig economy workers and specifically rideshare drivers are immigrants and people of color, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted a few years ago. I spoke to Wanda Hernandez, who’s been a rideshare driver for both Uber and Lyft in Springfield for almost a year.
“I have twelve hours on the street to earn $200. I have my expensive expenses. I have my house. I have to pay maintenance on my car,” Hernandez said, in Spanish. "We work a lot now [driving] on the street. It is not an adequate payment. We do not have security and we do not have support."
So, Hernandez told me, she would like to have an organization defend her as a driver.
And has Uber or Lyft had anything to say about this ballot initiative?
I reached out to both companies and while Lyft didn’t return my request for comment, Uber said they won’t be running an opposition campaign to Question 3. They say they do have some concerns, but plan to pursue changes in the Legislature.
So there’s no organized opposition to this ballot question. But what are the arguments for a “no” vote?
Some drivers on social media worry about paying union dues and that a union could decrease their flexibility.
And then there’s another group, Massachusetts Driver's United. They believe this initiative doesn’t do enough to include all gig workers. Kelly Cobb-Lemire is an organizer with the group and says these rideshare drivers usually work across many apps.
“We as an organization have been advocating that all app-based workers All, you know, not just rideshare, but all workers, including food delivery drivers, be included. So if you look at this, there's a whole group of workers that are being left out of this, including those that work for DoorDash, Instacart and Uber Eats,” Cobb-Lemire said.
And, going back to sector-based bargaining for a moment, would Massachusetts be the first state introducing it?
It appears so. There was an attempt made in 2015 in Seattle, Washington. The City Council passed an ordinance creating collective-bargaining rights for independent contractor drivers. But the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit against the city the following year saying it violated the Sherman Antitrust Act and the National Labor Relations Act.
Drafters of the Massachusetts proposal say they shored up holes found in Seattle’s ordinance. But, if the creation of a sector-based bargaining system passes in Massachusetts, it will be the first of its kind and likely a model for other states and other industries across the country.