On Tuesday, the Council’s Governance, Equity and Technology Committee will take up an ordinance making a big change to its 2015 ordinance granting Uber and Lyft drivers the right to unionize — and in the process cutting the heart out of the ordinance.
In May, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dealt the City of Seattle a setback in its defense of its ordinance granting Uber and Lyft drivers the right to collective bargaining. In June, the city petitioned the appeals court for an en banc rehearing of the case in front of the entire court.
Last Friday the court denied that petition.
This year the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has heard two challenges to the City of Seattle’s ordinance authorizing collective bargaining for Uber and Lyft drivers. One was filed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the other by a group of Uber and Lyft drivers. After back-to-back oral arguments in February, the appeals court ruled on the Chamber of Commerce case in May; it found that the ordinance was not exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act. Today it handed down its ruling in the second case, affirming the district court’s dismissal of the case — a win for the city.
Today the City of Seattle filed a petition with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, asking it to rehear en banc the appeal of the ongoing lawsuit filed by Uber and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over the city’s ordinance allowing Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize.
While everyone was watching the Council try to decide whether to impost a head tax, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made its own news today by ruling against the city in a case regarding its ordinance granting Uber and Lyft drivers the right to collective bargaining. But buried in the ruling is a legal precedent with potentially far greater impact.
This morning a panel of three judges from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard back-to-back arguments in two cases challenging the City of Seattle’s ordinance authorizing collective bargaining for Uber and Lyft (and other TNC) drivers.
Both sides found the judges to be deeply skeptical of some of their arguments.
Yesterday afternoon Council President Bruce Harrell let it be known that he intends to look at a series of issues related to taxis, for-hire drivers, and Transportation Network Companies such as Uber and Lyft. His intention would be to bring forward legislation in the first quarter of 2018.
It’s been almost two months since my last catch-all posting on the status of the City of Seattle’s various outstanding legal battles. Stuff has happened, so it’s time for an update.
Last week the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted the US Chamber of Commerce a temporary injunction of the city’s ordinance granting Uber drivers the right to collective bargaining. Today it made that injunction permanent pending the court’s final ruling on the merits of the appeal.
Yesterday U.S. District Court Judge Robert Lasnik issued a ruling in the lawsuit, brought by several Uber drivers, challenging the city’s ordinance that authorizes collective bargaining for Uber and Lyft drivers. Lasnik dismissed all of the plaintiff’s claims, ending the case at the district court level.