Seattle: we’ll pick a union for Uber drivers

In 2015 the city of Seattle passed a unique law imposing a collective bargaining law on Uber drivers and giving the city itself the power to select a union to represent the drivers. It chose the Teamsters Union, which already represented (competing) taxi drivers. Like the federal law of collective bargaining agreements, the city law purports to take away individual drivers’ rights to reach other deals, whether or not they voted for the union. “The Teamsters are allied with Yellow Cab and pushed for the 2015 ordinance requiring union negotiations.” Litigation in both state and federal court seeks to set aside the law on multiple grounds including pre-emption, antitrust, and privacy violation. [Daniel Fisher] More: WSJ editorial today.


  • This is different from a mafia shakedown operation … how?

    • The city has a legal right to enforce its will with force. Apart from that, no difference that I can see..

  • Seattle/King County has a progressive disease to rival any outbreak in the country. Check out city council member Kshama Sawant for a horrifying glimpse at what is befalling one of America’s most beautiful cities.

  • Good for the drivers!

  • Doesn’t this also violate freedom of association?

  • Nice little business model you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it.

  • Union members have achieved a lot over the years but unions are not perfect. I’d go to union halls and 90% of the members supported Bernie but the bosses were all for Hillary. A whole lot of cheating went on in the DNC and we ended up with Trump.

    And now union bosses are trying to steal our right to be self-employed.

    Uber is a godsend for students, artists, retired folk and anyone who needs to make a bit of extra money, legally, on our own terms, at a time of our own choosing, and without interference from dues-thirsty union bosses.

  • […] A judge has enjoined, for now, Seattle’s we’ll-pick-a-union-for-Uber-drivers ordinance [Jon Weinberg/On Labor, earlier] […]