Dive Brief:
- Sometimes a court decision is airtight. But in the case of a recent decision that upheld Seattle's law allowing gig economy drivers to unionize, there appears to be some wiggle room.
- According to ABC news, U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik tossed a lawsuit from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Uber is a member), ruling that the Chamber had no standing to bring the lawsuit. The judge added that it is premature to challenge the law because it's yet to take effect and so there are no consequences one way or the other.
- Lasnik, however dismissed the lawsuit "without prejudice," meaning it's possible for the same lawsuit to be brought down the road and "no precedent has been set" for the labor rights of workers in the so-called "gig economy," according to ABC.
Dive Insight:
Lee Adler, a lecturer in Employment Law at Cornell University’s Industrial and Labor Relations School, told ABC News that the judge based his decision on a technical definition of whether the Chamber or any of its associate members had the legal right to bring this case at this time.
Blair Holmes, a Chamber spokesperson, said in a statement that the judge, "made clear at oral argument that he stands ready to hear a challenge to Seattle’s unprecedented ordinance in the future.” But no one said whether or not the Chamber would go back to court at some future date.
The amount of legal wrangling over the on-demand workforce, such as Uber and Lyft drivers, continues to roll on. The situation has caused other lawsuits around the country, including a settlement in California and Massachusetts. Seattle, however is the first U.S. city to give on-demand drivers a right to unionize and collectively bargain on issues such as pay and working conditions.
Shannon Liss-Riordan, an attorney who represented drivers in those state settlements, told CNN the "debate will not end here." HR decision makers in the on-demand economy can only watch and wait.
