Within Uber-Waymo split, a key labor battle over AVs is being waged in the nation's capital
Uber and Waymo are increasingly at odds about the autonomous future, including in a labor battle over mass AV deployment in Washington, D.C.
In a surprising alliance, labor unions are taking on Uber in a major labor battle over autonomous vehicles (AVs) in Washington, D.C. The controversy revolves around a proposed bill, known as the Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Authorization Amendment Act, which would allow for the widespread use of AVs to transport passengers and goods in the District.
The D.C. Council is receiving significant pushback from organized labor over the bill, with concerns raised about the impact of AVs on wages and job opportunities for drivers. Currently, it is estimated that 35,000 people in D.C. work as gig work drivers, accounting for around 9% of the labor force, with much of the work being part-time. The city is currently facing an unemployment crisis, having lost over 100,000 jobs in the past year, largely due to federal job cuts.
Crystal Middleton, a part-time rideshare driver and member of 32BJ SEIU, expressed her concerns about the bill at a public comment session for the legislation. She argued that robotaxis do not pay taxes, raise families, vote, or make judgment calls when someone is in trouble, and that the bill is fundamentally about profit for Silicon Valley companies, not the local economy.
Uber, which has historically supported the expansion of AV technology, has taken a stance against the D.C. bill. Harry Hatfield, director of AV and AI policy at Uber, stated that AVs have the potential to make roads safer, accelerate electrification, expand access to transportation, and lower costs. However, the company has also set aside significant capital for robotaxi fleet development and equity investments in other AV developers.
The debate over the bill has highlighted the potential workforce disruption caused by AVs, with union leaders and members arguing that the bill largely ignores the transition of drivers to new roles. While some, like D.C. Councilmember Charles Allen, believe that the bill is a net benefit to transportation choices in the city, others, including the unions, contend that the bill fails to address the negative impact on drivers and the broader economy.
Written by urgent.news from CNBC's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
