Uber and Lyft Drivers in Massachusetts Win Right to Unionize

A state ballot measure was the first of its kind in the United States, but labor advocates worry it could lock Uber and Lyft drivers out of full-time employment status.

Ride-hailing drivers in Massachusetts won the right to unionize on Wednesday through a statewide ballot initiative, a first-of-its-kind victory that could set a precedent for gig worker legislation across the country.

The initiative passed 54 percent to 46 percent, and will give drivers for apps like Uber and Lyft the ability to form unions that have collective bargaining power — while still being classified as independent contractors.

The ballot measure was contentious among labor advocates, many of whom opposed it as a setback in the larger movement to reclassify ride-hailing drivers as employees who would, by default, be protected by the National Labor Relations Act.

The initiative, brought by the Service Employees International Union and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, will create a hearing process for drivers to bring complaints about unfair work practices in front of a state board. But it does not contain language about strike protections.

“In rhetoric, it’s a victory,” said Katie Wells, a senior fellow at Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive nonprofit. “But is it a material victory that will actually change the power imbalance and the ability of these workers to survive an exploitative and predatory economy? Probably not.”

The practice is known as sectoral bargaining, where workers unionize as an industry, in this case as ride-hailing drivers, and not as workers for a specific company. The measure does not include protections for food-delivery drivers.

A national wave of legislation on the gig economy has included Proposition 22 in California and laws on minimum pay and benefits in New York, Washington State and Minnesota. In June, Uber and Lyft settled a yearslong legal dispute with the Massachusetts attorney general and agreed to pay their drivers in the state a minimum rate with some benefits.

In an interview, April Verrett, president of the S.E.I.U., called the result “a monumental step forward” for gig workers who have been written out of labor laws.

Uber and Lyft did not oppose the initiative.

But Uber said in a statement that it was telling that the ballot proposition “just squeaked by” in a state known for its strong support of unions. “It’s clear that voters have reservations, and it’s now incumbent upon the legislature to address their concerns,” the company said.

Statewide labor laws can create protections for workers that patch holes in federal laws, which are especially weak for gig workers already, said Sharon Block, a labor professor at Harvard Law School. “So to see a sort of bespoke model of collective bargaining will be a really exciting experiment,” she added.

But that model can be tricky and, if done the wrong way, can discourage workers from fighting for additional rights like employee classification, said Veena Dubal, a professor at the University of California, Irvine, School of Law.

“The idea is that if there are state-level bargaining laws for workers who are carved out of the National Labor Relations Act, you want those laws to be written really carefully and account for failures of federal law,” Ms. Dubal said. “This isn’t that law, and that’s why Uber and Lyft are not opposing it.”

Drivers for Massachusetts Drivers United, which represents 1,800 ride-hailing drivers across the state, were mostly split on the measure, said Kelly Cobb-Lemire, an organizer with the group.

“We’re not against unionization,” Ms. Cobb-Lemire said. “But we don’t feel this goes far enough.”