In conclusion
California ride-hailing drivers would be able to collectively bargain for better wages and benefits under AB 1340. According to Uber and Lyft, it can result in lower availability and higher ride fees.
Greetings from CalMatters, the only nonprofit news organization dedicated exclusively to reporting on topics that impact all Californians. To get the most recent information and analysis on the most significant topics in the Golden State, sign up for WhatMatters.
For years, Californian Uber and Lyft drivers have been battling for improved pay and working conditions on the streets, in front of state legislators, in court, and on the ballot.
The state legislature is currently considering a bill that would permit ride-hailing drivers to form a union.
California will be the second state to allow ride-hailing drivers to engage in collective bargaining if Assembly Bill 1340 is approved. Voters in Massachusetts adopted a ballot proposal last year, making it the first state to do so.
The California law is opposed by the ride-hailing businesses, who claim it violates the spirit of Proposition 22, the ballot campaign they funded and which voters supported in 2020. It solidified the status of gig workers as independent contractors within the state. Additionally, the law restricted state legislators’ power to grant gig workers collective bargaining rights; however, that section was overturned by an appeals court.
When Prop. 22 was approved, drivers and other gig workers received some benefits, but they still have grievances, many of which are related to the fact that they are not regarded as employees. Many gig workers also don’t know where to go to dispute being removed from apps, receive assistance with other issues, or claim unpaid wages or health care stipends because the law essentially leaves no governmental agency in charge of enforcement.
The ability to collectively negotiate, according to some supporters and drivers, might resolve such problems. However, the gig-work sector cautions that this would need significant adjustments to their business model, which would increase travel costs and impact ride availability.
Hector Lopez, who has been a driver for Lyft in the Bay Area for a number of years and is active with the organization Gig Workers Rising, stated that we stand to gain a great deal from unionization. It may be the sole means of obtaining just compensation.
While study from the UC Berkeley Labor Center indicated that the average income for drivers, including tips and accounting for their full working shifts and expenses, was $9.09 per hour, an organization that represents Uber and Lyft has stated that drivers in California make an average of $37 per active hour.
Lack of communication when they require assistance is another frequent source of annoyance for drivers. Drivers must message a corporate representative using the Uber or Lyft app, or occasionally speak with them over the phone. However, Lopez recalls being able to seek assistance at a Lyft Hub, a real place with people he could speak with. Some years ago, such hubs shut down.
According to Lopez, we could have a union with an office where we could receive in-person assistance. That is a really significant item that they took away from us.
Not every driver will be present. According to Sergio Avedian, senior contributor for the Rideshare Guy, a YouTube program popular with gig workers, California drivers who claim to respect their status as independent contractors have a legitimate misgiving about joining a union.
However, he added that many drivers frequently complain about a lack of representation and power, particularly in regards to algorithmic transparency, rate reductions, and deactivations.
What the bill would do
According to a proposal before the Legislature, ride-hailing drivers would have the ability to organize and become members of a union, with which gig businesses would have to engage in sincere negotiations.
Additionally, beginning in 2026, it would mandate that ride-hailing services provide the state’s Public Employment Relations Board with driver lists and other driver data every three months.
The measure is opposed by a number of business associations and chambers of commerce, as well as the Protect App-Based Drivers & Services Coalition, an industry group that comprises Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and Instacart.
The group warned that the bill’s requirement that businesses provide the state with driver information, which would allow a prospective union to directly contact a dispersed workforce, is a dangerous violation of driver privacy and could lead to unsolicited texts, phone calls, and even visits to drivers, in a letter to lawmakers in July.
It is anticipated that many driver organizations would compete to become the state’s only ride-hailing drivers’ negotiating union. However, based on legislative committees’ analysis of the law, an organization would have access to driver lists if it could secure the support of 10% of active drivers as representatives. It would be illegal for any group to give such list to outside parties.
The disclosure provisions in the bill are supported by Nicole Moore, president of Rideshare Drivers United, a group located in Los Angeles. She claimed that the state is now unaware of how poorly we are being compensated. It’s anecdotal, but we could tell you. We require information.
According to Uber spokeswoman Zahid Arab, the measure will result in higher expenses due to the complexity of compliance and administration, as well as the need for the company to bargain with a union on wages and benefits. According to the trade association, granting drivers the ability to form a union may result in increased fare prices.
A representative for Lyft declined to comment on the bill.
On August 18, the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to consider the bill, which was co-authored by Democratic Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks of Oakland and Marc Berman of Palo Alto.
What s happening in Massachusetts
Drivers for Uber and Lyft in Massachusetts are currently striving to establish a union after winning the right to do so months ago.
After ten years of driving for Uber, Chiem Klot is attempting to organize drivers in the Boston area. He claims that each year, his pay becomes worse and worse. He claimed that he used to be able to earn $300 or $400 per day, but that he now only makes approximately $200 per day while driving for 12 hours every day.
READ NEXT
Uber, Lyft drivers could unionize under new proposal
According to Klot, there are more than 80,000 ride-hail drivers in Massachusetts. They all put forth a lot of effort yet earn relatively little money. Many of them are still unaware that they have the right to form a union. Additionally, some of them fear Uber may take revenge.
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and Service Employees International Union 32BJ collaborated to form the Massachusetts App Drivers Union.
Gabe Morgan, executive vice president of SEIU 32BJ, said through a spokesperson that thousands of drivers in Massachusetts have already signed unionization cards, and that besides fair compensation, drivers deserve transparency.
Will sectoral bargaining work?
According to Katie Wells, a tech and labor expert who co-wrote Disrupting D.C.: The Rise of Uber and the Fall of the City, sectoral bargaining, or group negotiations within a particular occupation, has been successful in some locations and industries. For example, in Los Angeles, hospitality workers have won wage standards and benefits. However, Wells expressed her worry that sectoral bargaining might not result in significant change in the ride-hailing business.
According to Wells, this is because the major actors in the gig economy have pushed to keep change cosmetic. She cited Prop. 22, which, among other things, guaranteed health care stipends to gig workers in California. However, a survey supported by the union revealed that few gig workers truly use or qualify for the stipends, which are not given to people who get public health benefits. Additionally, the poll revealed that 29% of gig workers were enrolled in Medi-Cal, California’s health insurance program for the underprivileged and disabled. The precise number of employees who get the stipends has not been disclosed by the corporations.
Sectoral bargaining could work, but it has to be done well, said Laura Padin of the National Employment Law Project, a research and advocacy group for low-wage workers. According to her, drivers should be protected by the National Labor Relations Act as they are under a lot of company management, but they are not since they are not regarded as employees. In this political environment, it may be the best we can hope for, Padin said.
Federal lawmakers have been trying for years to improve gig workers working conditions. The most recent proposal was introduced last week by Sens. Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Chris Murphy of Connecticut, both Democrats. It would require gig companies to disclose more detailed information about wages and fares to drivers and consumers; cap companies cut of each ride s fare at 25%, meaning 75% would go to drivers; and more.Other proposed federal legislationthat would help strengthen workers right to organize has languished for years. So other governments are trying to step in. At the state level, besides California, Minnesota and Illinois are also considering bills to give drivers collective-bargaining power.
But even if drivers are able to band together and unionize, they would still likely have to deal with more obstacles, experts say.
When drivers are able to organize and win labor standards through public policy directly, Uber tries to fight it, said Mariah Montgomery, national campaigns director for PowerSwitch Action, a network of advocacy groups. She mentioned what has happened in New York City, where driverswon minimum pay ratesthat began in 2019.
Last year,Bloombergreported that Uber and Lyft were using a loophole in the law and systematically locking drivers out preventing them from finding work on the apps during certain periods. Last month, the city s taxi commissionestablished new rulesordering the companies to give drivers 72 hours notice before locking them out.
READ NEXT
California in settlement negotiations with Uber, Lyft in massive wage-theft case
California companies wrote their own gig worker law. Now no one is enforcing it
Read more from CalMatters
Text
Get breaking news on your phone.
Download
Keep up with the latest via our app.
Sign up
Receive free updates in your inbox.
Nonpartisan, independent California news for all
We re CalMatters, your nonprofit and nonpartisan news guide.
Our journalists are here to empower you and our mission continues to be essential.
-
We are independent and nonpartisan.
Our trustworthy journalism is free from partisan politics, free from corporate influence and actually free for all Californians. -
We are focused on California issues.
From the environment to homelessness, economy and more, we publish the unfettered truth to keep you informed. -
We hold people in power accountable.
We probe and reveal the actions and inactions of powerful people and institutions, and the consequences that follow.
But we can t keep doing this without support from readers like you.
Please give what you can today. Every gift helps.
