California Clears Path for Rideshare Unions — 10% Trigger, 30% Certification, and the Risk to Flexibility

California has enacted a law that makes it easier for rideshare drivers to organize and for unions to win certification. Under the measure, a unionization process can begin when 10% of the state’s rideshare drivers submit cards expressing support, and a union may be certified with backing from as little as 30% of active drivers. The law also gives any certified union a one-year, challenge-free window during which ridesharing companies must bargain in good faith—effectively enabling sector-wide negotiations.

What the law does

The new law creates a streamlined pathway for organization and a temporary legal shield for certified unions. Key elements include:

• 10% of drivers can trigger a unionization process by filing support cards.
• A union may be certified with the support of roughly 30% of active drivers.
• Once certified, a union receives a one-year period in which its status cannot be legally challenged and companies are required to bargain in good faith.

Background: How we got here

The debate dates back to 2018, when the California Supreme Court applied the stricter "ABC test" to delivery couriers, tightening the criteria for classifying workers as independent contractors. Lawmakers extended the test across sectors in Assembly Bill 5 (A.B. 5), making it harder for many workers to remain classified as contractors. Voters later exempted app-based ride and delivery drivers from A.B. 5 by approving Proposition 22 in 2020, but legislators have since moved to regulate gig work through new means—most recently by creating this union pathway.

Potential effects on drivers and platforms

Supporters say the law opens a route to collective bargaining for workers who previously had limited options. Critics warn that sectoral bargaining encourages uniform standards across an industry, which often favor traditional employment models. For on-demand platforms that currently rely on flexible, ad-hoc schedules, sector-wide terms could push companies toward standardized shifts, quotas, or log-in rules that reduce the "log-on-when-you-want" freedom many drivers value.

"Organizing at scale tends to push employers toward standardized employment models, which can curtail ad-hoc scheduling and the flexibility drivers cite as their primary reason for choosing gig work."

There is precedent for platform responses to industry-wide mandates. After New York City established a minimum wage for rideshare drivers in 2019, Uber and Lyft temporarily locked some drivers out of their accounts to manage the impact. A 2023 law raising pay floors for app-based delivery workers produced deactivations and waitlists as platforms adjusted to higher labor costs—examples critics cite as likely outcomes if sector-wide terms are imposed on ridesharing.

Human impact

Consider a single mother who wants to pick up a few rides on an unexpected free evening: if platforms adopt regimented schedules or minimum guaranteed shifts, she may find it harder to log on and take on short windows of work that fit her life. That tension—between collective protections and individual flexibility—is central to the debate.

Political dynamics and potential spread

California often exports policy ideas. After A.B. 5, several states pursued similar ABC tests; advocates worry this union pathway could inspire comparable laws elsewhere. The politics are fluid: some Republican figures, including Senators J.D. Vance and Josh Hawley, have shown renewed interest in organized labor, which could broaden support for gig-worker organizing. On the left, some progressives view unionization as an incremental step rather than an endpoint—former California assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez has called unionization "a step forward" but not "the limit of what's possible." Teamsters President Sean O'Brien has criticized certain unionization approaches in other states, arguing they fall short of securing full employment rights for workers.

Bottom line

The law does not directly reclassify gig workers as employees. But by enabling industry-wide bargaining and protecting certified unions for a year, it nudges the system toward standardized terms that could resemble many outcomes sought by reclassification proponents. How companies and drivers respond in practice will determine whether the change strengthens worker protections, reduces flexibility, or produces a mixture of both.