Massachusetts voters passed a ballot measure on Nov. 5 that would allow online taxi drivers to unionize, making it the first U.S. state to allow drivers for ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft to unionize, according to foreign media reports.
U.S. media reported that results were in from 94 percent of precincts, with 53.9 percent of voters backing a new framework that would allow online ride-hailing drivers, who are considered independent contractors by the companies, to organize and collectively bargain with the companies over pay and benefits. American Media announced the results of the vote on Nov. 6 at noon.
Supporters said the referendum proposal, dubbed “Question 3,” could provide a model for other states to allow Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize and inspire union action across the United States. The move is seen as an important step in the push for more rights for online drivers.
Roxana Rivera, assistant president of 32BJ SEIU, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said the passage of the proposal shows that Massachusetts voters want drivers to be able to fight the influence of the growing platform companies. This victory shows a willingness to support drivers in their fight for fairer treatment and protection.
Rivera said in a statement, “Massachusetts workers scored a landmark victory with Proposition 3.”
Uber and Lyft said they would not participate in the campaign against Question 3. But both companies said they have concerns about some of the language in the proposal that they hope the state legislature will address.
In a statement released Nov. 6, Uber noted that despite Massachusetts being a “deeply blue, pro-union state,” the proposal “just barely passed.” The company said, “”It’s clear that voters had reservations, and it’s now the legislature’s responsibility to address their concerns.””
For its part, Lyft said in a statement, “With the passage of this ballot measure, we look forward to working together on its implementation in next year’s legislative session and addressing some of our wording concerns.”