The Lyft mustache. Photo by Alfredo Mendez, Flickr Creative Commons

Judge Tosses Final Lawsuit Against Ordinance Allowing Rideshare Drivers to Unionize

That means the city can move forward with implementing the law. For now.

Late Thursday afternoon, for the second time this month, U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik ruled in favor of Seattle’s for-hire driver collective bargaining ordinance. The ruling strikes down the final lawsuit against the controversial, first-in-the-nation law, which has been mired in a number of legal battles since it first passed in 2015.

The law allows Uber, Lyft, and other for-hire drivers—independent contractors, not employees—to form a union and collectively bargain for better working conditions. Despite strong disagreements late last year regarding how, exactly, the law should play out, the city’s rules have since been finalized: Drivers who have been working for at least three months and have made 52 trips within a 90-day period qualify for union membership. But pending several lawsuits, Lasnik had issued an injunction that prevented the city from moving forward with implementation. Now, he has dissolved the injunction, and the path is clear.

“The court cleared the way for the City to implement its first-in-the-nation law,” said City Attorney Pete Holmes in a statement. “In so doing, the court recognized the public importance of maintaining and promoting the safety and reliability of the for-hire transportation industry in the City of Seattle, goals which this law advances. We are very pleased with the court’s decision and will continue to vigorously defend this publicly important law on appeal.”

Thursday’s ruling applies to a lawsuit brought by 11 Uber drivers, represented by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, who argued that the law violated both their free speech rights under the First Amendment and the National Labor Relations Act by essentially compelling drivers to become part of the union (and thus pay dues), even if they didn’t want to. Lasnik struck down those claims, asserting that there is nothing in the ordinance that restricts their freedoms of speech and association and nothing that allows the union—in this case, Teamsters Local 117—to force drivers to join.

In early August, another lawsuit, brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was struck down because, Lasnik found, the collective bargaining ordinance does not violate federal antitrust laws, either. That case has already been appealed, but so far, there’s no injunction that prevents the city from moving forward.

Still, it is possible, if not likely, that Thursday’s ruling will be appealed, too. If that happens, there is a possibility that the plaintiffs could persuade a judge to issue yet another injunction, again stopping the city’s implementation of the ordinance. Of course, the city would oppose such an injunction, said Kimberly Mills, spokesperson for the City Attorney’s office, and will continue to defend the ordinance, no matter what.

Uber, naturally, is not happy; the company has long stood in opposition to the law. “The court’s ruling is not surprising,” said Brooke Steger, Uber General Manager for the Pacific Northwest, in a statement. “Unfortunately, if allowed to stand, thousands of drivers will be negatively impacted. The original ordinance passed by the City Council was never about benefiting drivers, but about helping Teamsters and taxi companies. We will continue fighting to protect independent drivers and prevent turning back the clock on transportation in Seattle.”

Teamsters Secretary-Treasurer John Scearcy used similar language (and called out Uber) when he applauded Lasnik’s first ruling in early August. “We hope Uber will respect the judge’s decision, stop its efforts to block the law, and recognize that, just like millions of other workers across the country, for-hire drivers have a basic right to self-determination and to stand together with the representative of their choosing to improve their pay and working conditions,” he said at the time. “We will continue to help drivers fight for that right.”

sbernard@seattleweekly.com

More in News & Comment

Amazon’s scope of Bellevue development elevates

600-foot-tall tower to bring nearly 600 workers to Bellevue so far

Countywide birthday party sparks hope for girls aging out of foster care

Celebrate 18! was held by nonprofit Eileen & Callie’s Place on Saturday.

New deal makes Mukilteo teachers among state’s highest paid

The agreement also reduces the size of special education classes while boosting support for students.

VoteWA is a $9.5 million program that came online last May and is meant to unify all 39 county voting systems in the state into a single entity. Courtesy image
WA’s new voting system concerns county elections officials

VoteWA has run into some problems in recent months as the Aug. 6 primary election draws closer.

‘Feedback loops’ of methane, CO2 echo environmental problem beyond Washington

University of Washington among researchers of climate change’s effects in global temperatures.

Early wake-up call: Twin quakes under Monroe rattle region

Thousands of people felt them. They were magnitude 4.6 and 3.5 and hit minutes apart.

Warning sign for a road closure. File photo
King County examines options to fund roads and bridges

Shortfall is roughly $250 million each year; county may seek tax from unincorporated voters.

City of Everett wins in bikini barista federal court case

The baristas are unsure of their next steps but may file for a rehearing, their lawyer said.

As time expires, Eyman lacks signatures for anti-tax measure

In spite of the setback, Eyman still has an initiative dealing with car tabs on the November ballot.

Most Read