Two ballot questions in Massachusetts are set to potentially reshape the relationship between gig-economy drivers and tech giants like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash. The state’s highest court, the Supreme Judicial Court, recently ruled that proposed ballot questions regarding drivers’ employment rights and status meet the requirements outlined in the state Constitution. This decision allows the questions to proceed to the November 5 ballot, despite challenges seeking to block them.
One set of industry-backed questions aims to establish under Massachusetts law that gig-economy drivers for ride-hail and delivery platforms are independent contractors, not employees. The campaign behind these proposals, Flexibility and Benefits for Massachusetts Drivers, filed multiple versions this cycle after a previous attempt was struck down by the SJC two years ago. Justice Gabrielle Wolohojian wrote in the ruling that the court could revisit the issue if more than one petition was placed on the November ballot.
The court’s decision sets the stage for a contentious and costly campaign to sway voters for and against the question, as labor unions and tech companies prepare to battle it out. Conor Yunits, spokesperson for the Flexibility and Benefits for Massachusetts Drivers committee, hailed the decision as a victory for rideshare and delivery drivers who have fought for years for this moment.
Proponents of the contractor question argue that it would ensure drivers maintain the flexibility they value. However, critics contend that it would prevent drivers from receiving the benefits entitled to employees. The question of whether gig drivers should be classified as employees or contractors is also the subject of a pending state lawsuit filed by Gov. Maura Healey, alleging that companies deny drivers protections like a minimum wage by misclassifying them as contractors.
Massachusetts AFL-CIO President Chrissy Lynch, who leads the opposition campaign Massachusetts is Not For Sale, criticized the court’s decision as a step back for the state’s voters, workers, consumers, taxpayers, and law-abiding businesses. Lynch emphasized the importance of protecting workers’ rights, consumers, and communities.
In addition to the contractor question, the SJC also cleared a separate question for the ballot that would allow ride-hail drivers to unionize. This question is supported by the Drivers Demand Justice Coalition, which includes labor unions such as the International Association of Machinists and Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union. The coalition believes that drivers deserve basic workplace rights and protections.
However, opponents like Paul Craney, spokesman for the Fiscal Alliance Foundation, argue that allowing drivers to unionize could eliminate the ability for independent contractors to be their own boss and potentially lead to higher prices for riders. Craney also raised concerns about the proposal preempting federal and state labor laws, potentially resulting in a lengthy legal battle.
Campaigns have until July 3 to submit enough voter signatures to Secretary of State Bill Galvin to secure a spot on the ballot. As the November election approaches, the debate over the status and rights of gig-economy drivers in Massachusetts is likely to intensify, with significant implications for both drivers and the tech companies they work for.
