Washington, D.C., passed a restaurant reform bill requiring Mayor Muriel Bowser to conduct a comprehensive study on the working conditions and wages of app-based delivery workers, with a report due by July 1, 2025. This study aims to scrutinize various aspects of gig work, including pay rates, total income, expenses, equipment needs, hours worked, and the potential for benefits that could be carried across different gig platforms. This legislative move signals the city’s initial step towards potentially regulating the pay and conditions of delivery drivers, mirroring actions taken by other cities like New York, which led to the establishment of a minimum wage for delivery workers.
Unlike New York City’s delivery worker protections, which resulted in new regulations based on a mandated study, the D.C. bill only requires the completion of the study, without specifying subsequent regulatory actions. The proposed analysis in D.C. hopes to address the complexity of gig economy work, covering the multifaceted nature of delivery work and the potential for systemic improvements.
DoorDash has expressed its intention to work with D.C.’s political leaders on this initiative, despite criticizing the methodology of a similar study conducted in New York City. The company advocates for a study that encompasses a broad range of stakeholders and reflects the experiences of a significant number of workers to ensure the findings are representative and actionable.
Additionally, the bill introduces regulations affecting how app-based delivery companies operate. It prohibits these companies from limiting a restaurant’s delivery radius to less than four miles or from adjusting the availability of delivery workers based on the restaurant’s commission payments. Another notable requirement is that contracts between aggregators and restaurants must allow delivery workers to use the restaurant’s bathroom facilities.
DoorDash has voiced concerns that the restrictions on delivery radii could lead to negative consequences, such as higher prices for consumers, potential declines in food quality, and dissatisfaction among workers due to longer delivery routes. The company describes these rules as rigid and suggests they may not adequately consider the implications for all parties involved.
