The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has sued Seattle over a ridesharing ordinance allowing Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize.

As Reuters reports, the city last year became the nation's first to pass a law allowing drivers, including those who work for services like Lyft and Uber, to collectively negotiate pay and working conditions. The Chamber, a lobbying group representing more than 3 million businesses, wants a judge to suspend that law.

A 31-page complaint filed Thursday alleges that the ordinance violates federal antitrust statutes and results in increased prices and reduced quality of service.

"This ordinance threatens the ability not just of Seattle, but of every community across the country, to grow with and benefit from our evolving economy," Amanda Eversole, president of the Chamber's Center for Advanced Technology and Innovation, said in a statement.

"Technology companies are leading the charge when it comes to empowering people with the flexibility and choice that comes with being your own boss, and that is something to be championed, not stifled," she added.

Seattle's ordinance—approved unanimously by the city council but opposed by Mayor Ed Murray—threatens the viability of that economy, the Chamber said.

"This has never been tried before, because it is clearly inconsistent with federal antitrust and labor laws," the chamber's Chief Legal Officer Lily Fu Claffee added.

Companies like Lyft and Uber aren't exactly big fans of the law either. As Quartz reported last month, Uber told its customer service reps to contact drivers and read an anti-union script.

"The Chamber of Commerce's challenge to the Seattle ordinance raises serious questions not only about whether the city has run afoul of federal laws, but also about the impact on drivers who rely on ridesharing to earn flexible income," an Uber spokeswoman told PCMag.

"Drivers choose Lyft to earn extra money when, where and for however long they can work," a company spokeswoman said in a statement. "We continue to share concerns raised by city officials that the ordinance threatens the privacy of drivers, conflicts with longstanding federal labor and antitrust law, and may undermine the flexibility that makes Lyft so attractive both to drivers and passengers."

The Seattle City Council declined to comment on the potential litigation.

Editor's Note: This story was updated at 10:45 a.m. Eastern with a response from the Seattle City Council, and again at 11:20 a.m. with comment from Uber.

Further Reading

Mobile App Reviews