Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Seattle Ordinance Giving Drivers Right to Bargain Collectively Violates Federal Law, Chamber Says in Lawsuit

By April Upchurch Fredrickson, Howard M. Bloom & Philip B. Rosen on March 9, 2016
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has challenged the Seattle City Ordinance giving drivers of app-based transportation companies that use independent contractors to provide services (such as Uber and Lyft) the right to collectively bargain.  (See our post, Seattle City Council Enacts Ordinance Giving Drivers Right to Collectively Bargain, Legal Challenges Expected.)

On its face, the federal lawsuit seeks to invalidate the Ordinance on the grounds that it violates federal anti-trust law and is preempted by federal labor law.  However, if the Chamber is successful, the lawsuit will have accomplished a much larger goal – the promotion of competition to benefit consumers, the elimination of a major challenge to app-based companies’ business model, and protection of these companies’ ability to operate union-free.

The National Labor Relations Act governs most private sector employees’ rights to bargain collectively. The Chamber argues that the Ordinance is preempted by the NLRA because (1) it attempts to regulate independent contractors who were intentionally excluded from the collective bargaining requirements of the NLRA, and (2) administration of the Ordinance requires the Seattle Director of Finance to determine whether a particular driver is an independent contractor or employee, a determination which is reserved to the exclusive jurisdiction of the NLRB. The Chamber has asked the court to declare the Ordinance unlawful and enjoin its enforcement.

The lawsuit is not expected to diminish the Seattle City Council’s support for the legislation or deter unions from seeking to represent drivers pursuant to the Ordinance. Teamsters Local 117 has publicly denounced the lawsuit as an attempt to derail collective bargaining for independent contractor drivers.  Regardless, given the importance of the issue and the potential economic impact to app-based transportation companies, the litigation is expected to be hard fought.

 

Photo of April Upchurch Fredrickson April Upchurch Fredrickson
Read more about April Upchurch FredricksonEmail
Photo of Howard M. Bloom Howard M. Bloom
Read more about Howard M. BloomEmail
Photo of Philip B. Rosen Philip B. Rosen

Philip B. Rosen is a Principal in the New York City office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and a member of the Firm’s Management Committee. Mr. Rosen also leads the firm’s Labor Practice Group. He joined the Firm in 1979 and served as Managing…

Philip B. Rosen is a Principal in the New York City office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and a member of the Firm’s Management Committee. Mr. Rosen also leads the firm’s Labor Practice Group. He joined the Firm in 1979 and served as Managing Partner of the New York City office from 1989 to 2009.

Mr. Rosen lectures extensively, conducts management training, and advises clients with respect to legislative and regulatory initiatives, corporate strategies, business ethics, social media, reorganizations and reductions-in-force, purchase/sale transactions, sexual harassment and other workplace conduct rules, compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, wrongful discharge and other workplace litigation, corporate campaigns and union organizing matters, collective bargaining, arbitration and National Labor Relations Board proceedings. He has been quoted by the press on many labor matters, including the National Labor Relations Board’s recent initiatives on protected concerted activity and the proposed Notice Posting requirements.

Read more about Philip B. RosenEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Labor & Collective Bargaining
  • Organization:
    Jackson Lewis P.C.

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo