The Washington Senate on Friday passed a bill that gives concert drivers certain benefits and protections, while not allowing them to be classified as employees – a long-standing priority for travel companies such as Uber and Lyft.
While the vote seems to pave the way for final adoption, after such a measure was passed by the State House last week, the two bills will still have to be agreed before they can be sent to the governor for approval. Gov. Jay Insley did not say whether he intended to sign the law.
Mike Folk, a spokesman for Mr Insley, said on Friday that the governor’s office usually did not “speculate on the bill”, adding: “Once lawmakers send it to our office, we will evaluate it”.
The Senate bill – the result of a compromise between companies and at least one prominent local union, Teamsters – was approved by 40 to 8.
In a statement, John Schersey, secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 117, said the union was “proud to be in solidarity with Uber and Lyft drivers in winning their wage demands” and other benefits.
Uber and Lyft noted in regulatory documents that requiring drivers to be classified as employees would require changes in their business model and could leave them financially exposed. They sought similar compromises in states, including California and New York, but failed amid resistance from other unions and workers’ advocates, who argued that concert drivers should not be content with second-class status. Many of these defenders also criticized the bill in Washington.
“While the bill provides some benefits to drivers, it will forever lock the door for drivers to have access to their rights as employees,” said Brian Chen of the National Labor Law Project, an advocacy group. “This is a mistake with serious consequences, which is worrying given how fast this bill is moving through the legislature.
Under the compromise, drivers will receive benefits such as paid sick leave and a minimum wage. The bill will also create a process for drivers to appeal so-called deactivations that prevent them from finding work through company applications.
While the minimum wage rates apply only to the time drivers spend with a passenger in the car, supporters of the bill say the rates are set high enough to fairly compensate drivers for all their working time after spending. Prices will be adjusted over time to take into account increases in the cost of living.
As with other contractors, drivers must cover all payroll taxes and cannot form a union under federal law.
Updated
March 4, 2022, 8:36 pm ET
The bill is largely silent on unemployment benefits, something employees are entitled to, but the state of Washington often finds that concert drivers must now receive these benefits. The bill will set up a working group to study what the companies’ contributions to concerts in the Unemployment Trust Fund should be, an issue that is controversial in other countries.
One particularly controversial feature of the bill is that it will block local jurisdictions from regulating drivers’ rights. Such a function helped spark the opposition, which killed the prospects for such a bill in New York State last year.
Seattle has passed a stable minimum wage law for concert drivers in 2020, which aimed to provide drivers with an hourly wage of approximately $ 30 before spending and has been sharply criticized by concert companies. The state-wide bill approved on Friday kept current rates in Seattle, which will remain higher than the rest of the state, but will overtake similar legislation in the future.
Against the backdrop of legislative action in the state of Washington, the possibility of a voting measure was looming, which could lock in the status of a contractor with less benefits for drivers. After California passed a law in 2019 that effectively classifies concert workers as employees, Uber, Lyft and other concert companies spent approximately $ 200 million on a voting measure, Proposal 22, which lifted those protections. The law is still pending after a state judge ruled it unconstitutional.
Liz Berry, who introduced the bill to the state of Washington, said the differences between it and proposal 22 “could not be more serious.”
“My focus was: What do the workers want? What do drivers want? And we do whatever they ask, “Berry said in an interview, adding that, unlike California law,” our bill has real benefits that Washington State officials enjoy. “
Jen Hensley, head of Lyft’s government liaison department, said in a statement that the bill was “a decision that Washington State drivers strongly support.” It not only provides significant new benefits, but also extends important protections to them. ”A statement from Uber echoed those comments.
But some lawmakers in Washington had doubts.
Ahead of Friday’s vote, Sen. Mike Padden, who opposed the bill, was worried about the speed of the approval process. “I have some concerns about the bill itself, but I also have some concerns that I can’t actually check it properly,” he said.
Representative Debra Entenman, the only Democrat to vote against the bill in the Washington House of Representatives, said in a statement after it passed in the Senate that “this bill requires too much from the state, supplies too little for drivers and increases transportation costs for my voters.” they often rely on travel-sharing companies for inadequate public transport opportunities. ”
Workers’ advocates are worried that other countries will try to repeat the law. “I hope Governor Insley seeks further analysis of his potential impact,” said Terry Gerstein, a labor rights attorney at the Harvard Law School’s Labor and Working Life Program. “I would urge other countries not to use this bill or the fugitive public process as a model.