The US Chamber of Commerce, an Uber subsidiary and the city of Seattle have agreed to lay down their swords in a lawsuit challenging the city’s ordinance that lets ride-hailing, app-based drivers unionize, resolving a three-year court battle that saw two appeals to the Ninth Circuit, reported Law 360.
In a stipulation for dismissal reached on Thursday and signed by US District Judge Robert S. Lasnik on Friday, the Chamber, Uber Technologies Inc. subsidiary Rasier and Seattle agreed to dismiss the remaining claims that the city’s 2015 law giving for-hire drivers for apps like Uber and Lyft, who are typically independent contractors, the right to collectively bargain runs afoul of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act.
The stipulation did not provide details behind the decision to drop the suit, but did specify that the claims would be dismissed without prejudice and without an award of fees or costs to any party.
The Chamber and Rasier argued that Seattle’s ordinance improperly authorizes and facilitates “horizontal group boycotts” by clearing the way for groups of unionized independent drivers to muscle out rival drivers by preventing them from contracting with ride-hailing companies outside the terms of a collective bargaining agreement.
But Seattle countered that it tweaked the law to remove potentially problematic provisions authorizing horizontal price-fixing.
In a statement on Friday, the city said it was pleased the parties agreed to drop the lawsuit and that it would turn its focus to working with Uber, Lyft and other transportation network companies on the “Fare Share Plan” that creates fair compensation standards and worker protections for drivers, while also investing in affordable housing and transit.
The plan requires that drivers be paid at least the equivalent of Seattle’s large employer minimum wage, plus benefits and expenses, according to the statement, among other benefits for the drivers.
Full Content: Law 360
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Judge Mehta Questions Both Sides in Landmark Google Antitrust Case
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
FCC Urges Urgent Funding for Removal of Chinese Telecom Equipment from U.S. Networks
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Former Pioneer CEO Facing Potential Criminal Charges For Colluding With OPEC
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea’s Antitrust Regulator Greenlights K-Pop Powerhouse Deal
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Exxon’s Pioneer Purchase Approved, Former CEO Barred from Board
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI