Dear Governor Jay Inslee, Veto HB 2076 And Protect Workers’ Rights
Without the status of employee, workers are left without key benefits and protections, such as the right to be paid for all hours worked.
March 25, 2022
VIA EMAIL
Governor Jay Inslee
Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 40002
Olympia, WA 98504–0002
Dear Governor Inslee,
We write to urge you to veto HB 2076, in order to enable study in future sessions of how best to protect workers, passengers, the environment, traffic flow, and more. At the minimum, we strongly recommend a veto of Section 32 of the bill, an unprecedented provision which would preempt Washington localities from passing any legislation to regulate transportation network companies.
HB 2076 poses a dire threat to workers’ rights and would perpetuate the rash of preemption we’re seeing across the country.
Public Rights Project is a national non-profit organization committed to the equitable enforcement of our laws. We work with state, local, and tribal governments around the country to ensure that the promise of our laws are a reality for those who have been historically underserved. Among our priorities is to ensure that workers exploited by misclassification are afforded the full protection that the law allows and to fight against the erosion of existing protections.
HB 2076 is a bad deal for workers. The bill would codify in Washington many of the components of Proposition 22, the initiative that Uber, Lyft, and other gig companies spent over $224 million (a record) to push through California’s ballot initiative process.
Without the status of employee, drivers for Uber and Lyft are left without key benefits and protections, such as the right to be paid for all hours worked.
National workers’ rights organizations expressed grave concerns about the bill, which was passed in haste before the end of the legislative session. But the creation of a second-class system for gig drivers is not the only part of this bill that’s grabbed our attention.
We work as part of a coalition of lawyers who fight against what are known as abusive preemption laws. Abusive preemption occurs when states take advantage of legislative or executive authority to strip power from local governments aimed at protecting their workers, consumers, and residents.
The Washington bill, if signed into law, would not only wipe out municipal laws in relation to transportation network companies and Uber and Lyft drivers, but would also prevent any Washington cities from enacting future laws on this topic.
This means, for example, that cities could not require Uber and Lyft drivers to be given hazard pay (a higher hourly wage due to safety considerations), if they wanted to. It also means that Seattle or other cities could no longer establish their own minimum wages for drivers.
With very limited exceptions, the bill prohibits localities throughout Washington from legislating at all in relation to transportation network companies and drivers. Localities could not pass environmental requirements aimed at these companies, or impose any new taxes, fees, or other charges.
Our coalition has been tracking bills around the country that use preemption to override local governments seeking to do more.
During the 2021 legislative session, we followed more than 450 bills where states looked to quash a variety of local efforts on issues ranging from police reform and tenant protections to LGBTQ equality.
Abusive preemption bills like these can be found in legislatures around the country, but they are most concentrated and prolific in a few. In places like Florida and Texas, the legislatures have put local reform in the crosshairs.
For example, Texas passed numerous laws in 2021 that attempted to reverse local election administration efforts by Harris County (where Houston is located), including a law that criminalizes soliciting requests for mail-in ballots, even from those who are eligible to vote by mail. That same legislature passed a law seeking to punish the City of Austin for creating an independent department for 911 dispatch services and piloting other common-sense public safety reforms.
In Florida, our organization is part of a case challenging a state law that subjects local governments to budget overrides by the Governor and the Cabinet — a body called the Administration Commission — if they decide to reduce law enforcement budgets at all. Another bill currently being considered by the state legislature would allow businesses to sue cities if any local legislation, like mask requirements or hazard pay, allegedly impacts corporate profits.
In other places, states are contemplating measures that would strip local prosecutors of their autonomy and discretion — a backlash to reform measures implemented by many urban districts to reduce incarceration.
These are just a few examples of a growing threat to workers’ rights, civil rights, and other reform measures.
Washington should not align itself with these other states on preemption.
Just as local governments responded quickly to COVID, including through the passage of emergency measures for workers, they need flexibility to respond to other crises and serve the immediate needs of their residents. For example, Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine and other factors have caused a rapid and sustained increase in gas prices.
Gig drivers may need to absorb those additional costs on their own, making their efforts less profitable and sustainable. No city could even attempt to ameliorate that problem if HB 2076 passes.
We hope that you strongly consider the implications of the preemption language in the bill and veto it. Tying the hands of city leaders will obstruct them from tailoring local solutions for local problems. This type of abusive preemption should have no place in Washington.
Should you have any questions or need further information, do not hesitate to reach out. Thank you for your consideration of these important issues.
Sincerely,
/s/ Jonathan B. Miller
Jonathan B. Miller
Chief Program Officer
Marissa Roy
Staff Attorney
