Massachusetts Rideshare Drivers Sign Up for Unionization – And Spotlight Potential New State Law Labor Avenues

In late May 2026, the App-Based Driver’s Union (ADU) became the first labor union certified to represent rideshare drivers in the nation. It reached that milestone using a streamlined organizing process under a new Massachusetts law, which allows a union to be certified without a vote and to represent drivers at a “sectoral” level. 

This system is not just a quirk of Massachusetts’ labor-friendly politics: it’s part of a growing state-level response to the perceived shortcomings of the NLRA and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Unions and union-friendly lawmakers have long decried the limitations of the NLRA, and the Massachusetts law represents an increasingly common response. More and more, states are trying to create their own workarounds to supplement or supplant the NLRA. For example, states have enacted laws banning or severely restricting employer so-called “captive audience” meetings, and statutes related to unemployment benefits for striking workers. Some state laws also require employers that are in the state procurement process to agree to labor peace agreements to qualify for bids. 

In the short term, the ADU’s success could encourage unions to organize rideshare drivers in other states. More significantly, the Massachusetts legislation (and the results of bargaining) could create a model for similar schemes in other sectors, especially those that fall outside the purview of the NLRA. 

What Happened and Why? 

The certification is a result of the 2024 voter initiative in Massachusetts to permit rideshare drivers that generate work from electronic apps to choose to become part of a union.¹ The Act creates a new system of organizing and bargaining for rideshare drivers that could also be a model for other “gig economy” workers; industries that that rely on independent contractors; or sectors that have remote or disparate workers that do not have a regular worksite. 

The Massachusetts statute sets out the new parameters for rideshare drivers regarding the organizing process (which can be done via card check or election), creates a sectoral bargaining framework, and forbids “unfair work policies.” Exactly how bargaining will play out remains an open question 

Why the NLRA was not a Roadblock Here 

The NLRA excludes from the definition of “employee” any person “having the status of an independent contractor.” In other words, independent contractors or workers do not fall into the definition of “employee” and cannot bargain collectively under the NLRA. For that reason, rideshare drivers and other similar “gig” economy workers do not qualify as employees under the NLRA and cannot use its procedures, including the procedures to elect a union, collective bargaining, and administration of unfair labor practice charges. 

Whereas the NLRA presumes that workers will choose a union (or not) workplace by workplace, the Massachusetts law requires them to choose a single union, statewide, for the whole sector. Likewise, while the NLRA assumes that bargaining occurs at the workplace level, the Massachusetts system elevates it to the industry level. 

This Massachusetts law is likely to be challenged in court, and raises significant questions about preemption, antitrust law, and constitutional law. While the statute contains specific carve-outs from federal and state antitrust laws, it remains to be seen whether those exemptions hold up. California has a similar statute that permits rideshare drivers to organize, but no union has yet successfully organized the drivers. Minnesota and Illinois also are considering similar pathways to unionization for rideshare drivers. Other states have considered similar statutory schemes in other industries, but those efforts have failed when challenged in court. 

Looking Ahead – What This May Mean for Employers 

It remains unclear how effective these state-level pathways will be in creating lasting union membership. The effort in Massachusetts has unfolded as rideshare drivers face competition from autonomous vehicles and self-driving taxis. This anxiety concerning the future of artificial intelligence, and its impact on job security will continue to drive employee fears and concern over worker voice, and may drive similar efforts in other sectors. 

However, employers can take steps now to be ahead of the curve, including: 

• State and Legislative Action – Be aware of your government relations team and encourage them to focus on these issues of state-specific labor law avenues. Be vigilant of labor developments in jurisdictions in which you operate. 
• Engage Employees, Especially Remote Employees – While employees value remote work and independence, those employees are more likely to feel isolated and/or at risk of losing their jobs to AI. Employee engagement and communication are the best antidotes to these fears. 
• Communication – Overcommunicate with employees regarding your plans concerning AI, modernization, and the basics of pay and benefits. 

For now, it remains to be seen whether other states will follow Massachusetts’ lead regarding sectoral bargaining for ride-share drivers and independent contractors generally or continue to look for other state-specific ways to avoid the reach (and perceived shortcomings) of the NLRA.