Autonomous trucks

California politics could cause a reversal on autonomous trucks

A new Democratic governor could shift gears away from the Newsom years on autonomous trucks to appease labor.

By Chase DiFeliciantonio

For years, Gov. Gavin Newsom has swatted down union-backed efforts to shield trucking jobs from automation. Now, politically powerful union leaders are pushing his would-be successors to change course, a move that could pump the brakes in California on an industry that’s starting to accelerate elsewhere.

The pressure on Democratic candidates competing for labor’s support in the crowded June primary comes as the Newsom administration plans to finalize new rules as soon as next month to allow the testing of autonomous big-rigs on state roads.

The march toward driverless freight is emerging as a political litmus test here, with several Democrats surveyed by POLITICO signaling they would slow or rein in autonomous trucking — drawing a stark contrast with Newsom and aligning themselves with union demands.

“There are safety issues. There are employment issues. I think that we’re going to have to,” billionaire Tom Steyer said when asked if he would back a mandate requiring human safety drivers in autonomous delivery vehicles. “We should be making sure that we don’t make dramatic changes in the way that people work.”

Lorena Gonzalez, head of the influential California Federation of Labor Unions, said in an interview that protecting middle-class jobs, especially delivery and driving jobs, is the group’s “No. 1 priority.”

While labor has largely been losing the fight against self-driving vehicles in California, a new governor in Sacramento could change all that with a signature.

The campaign for former Rep. Katie Porter, who secured an early endorsement from the California Teamsters last year, said she would support legislation backed by the union to largely prohibit autonomous delivery to homes and businesses.

And longer-shot candidates, like former California State Controller Betty Yee and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, said they would get behind legislation requiring safety drivers in some autonomous vehicles. Antonio Villaraigosa, the former Los Angeles mayor and former Assembly speaker, said he too believed drivers should be present until the technology can be proven fully safe.

For the moment, at least one of the leading Democratic candidates is staying mum on the details — as tech money pours into the Golden State this cycle. Rep. Eric Swalwell hasn’t committed to a position on autonomous vehicles, and neither have the two Republicans in the field who are notching big poll numbers in deep-blue California. None of the three responded to questions from POLITICO.

California is the only state that prohibits even the testing of autonomous big rigs on public roads — a sore point for the tech industry.

But Newsom has stymied legislative efforts in recent years to more permanently protect delivery jobs from the technology, vetoing bills in 2023 and 2024 that would ban heavy duty self-driving vehicles or require safety drivers in autonomous vehicles over 10,000 pounds. In one veto the governor called the legislation “unnecessary” given his administration’s commitment “to addressing the present and future challenges for work and workers in California, and the existing regulatory framework.”

Now, the Department of Motor Vehicles under Newsom may loosen the state’s testing ban before he leaves office, as labor also bristles at the influx of robotaxis on California roads. A new regulation could come as soon as April, with permits potentially issued later this year.

Asked about the DMV’s proposed trucking rules, Newsom spokesperson Anthony Martinez stressed they balanced public safety and innovation, saying the regulations “establish rigorous safety standards while responsibly opening the door to emerging transportation technologies that are already rapidly advancing in states across the country and around the world, helping define the future of mobility.”

The administration has previously said the autonomous trucking industry stands to create thousands of jobs and spur investment in the state, warning that limiting it could push those benefits elsewhere. But allowing self-driving trucks on California highways would run afoul of unions like the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents tens of thousands of union drivers in the state.

“We’re hopeful to have a governor who is more engaged in those discussions and not just simply saying ‘no’ because of innovation,” Gonzalez said.

Tia Orr, the executive director of SEIU California, said in a statement that “innovation cannot come at the cost of worker livelihoods or community safety.” The union has yet to endorse a candidate but has ruled out the tech-friendly Democratic San Jose mayor, Matt Mahan, along with the Republican contenders.

Teamsters California Co-Chair Peter Finn said California voters “want a leader willing to relentlessly stand up for people and not be afraid to fight to protect the good middle class jobs that our communities depend on.”

Beyond job protections, casting doubt on the safety of autonomous vehicles has been central to the argument for driver requirements, which some candidates have echoed.

“Until we have thoroughly tested all of this, we need a butt in the cab,” Villaraigosa said in an interview. “That’s what Teamsters call it.”

That position would likely be welcomed by California Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who has tried unsuccessfully for four years running to either require safety drivers in trucks or prohibit autonomous vehicles from hitting the delivery routes.

Her bill to limit autonomous deliveries to most homes and businesses statewide, introduced last year, is still moving through the Legislature. That measure also drew opposition from tech industry groups like Chamber of Progress, which echoed Newsom’s veto language in calling it “unnecessary” and saying it could choke off innovation.

“No matter who’s in office, my focus won’t change — I’ll continue to be worried about what automation means for public safety and for jobs,” Aguiar-Curry said in a statement.

Martinez, the spokesperson for Newsom, declined to take a position on Aguiar-Curry’s pending bill. “California is committed to leading the nation in both technological innovation and public safety,” he said.

Autonomous vehicle proponents say the state’s existing restrictions are already causing damage.

“The economic benefits are moving to other states,” said Earl Adams Jr., general counsel with PlusAI, which makes autonomous trucking technology.

Adams, the former chief counsel of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, said companies like his are already testing their technology in places like Arizona, Nevada and Texas. He said his industry is hoping for an opening in California — and an overriding federal framework on autonomous trucks.

The business case for deploying autonomous trucks in particular focuses on a shortage of drivers in the U.S. and the creation of a market worth more than $500 billion, according to some estimates.

Between 3.4 million and 4.4 million truck driving jobs could disappear across the U.S. and Europe if the technology is deployed rapidly. Some in the industry argue automation will simply fill unmet driver demand. Testing and some autonomous trucking are already happening in Texas, Arizona, Nevada and elsewhere.

Mahan, the centrist mayor of San Jose, said he didn’t support the “butts in seats” approach when it came to autonomous vehicles, and said he was concerned about pushing innovation out of state, worries voiced by the Newsom administration.

“We can put our head in the sand and say, ‘No more AI, no more technology,’” Mahan said. “But that doesn’t mean that Texas and China won’t go full steam ahead with these industries and reap the benefits of it.”

Mahan, who has enjoyed a stream of early cash and support from Silicon Valley luminaries like Google co-founder Sergey Brin, said technology-driven change always includes transition periods “where the public sector must step in proactively to reduce the impact on people whose jobs are changing rapidly.”

Still, he said, he would rather have that innovation in California “and shape it to make people’s lives better … to make sure people have access to the jobs of the future.”

During a candidate forum last year, every Democrat in the race at the time expressed support for having a human operator present in big rigs, Gonzalez recalled. She said she was confident that more recent entrants like Swalwell understood the issue from the labor perspective.

But Swalwell’s campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment about autonomous vehicles, and representatives for former Biden administration official Xavier Becerra, another Democrat in the race, also did not provide comment.

The Republicans in the race, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton, did not respond to requests for comment.

Meanwhile, labor isn’t just interested in protecting its trucking lanes. Unions are expected to push for more protections for rideshare drivers as well this year, as Waymo and other robotaxis gain popularity and regulatory approvals to operate. A landmark deal last year allowed rideshare drivers to unionize with the SEIU union in California.

At least one candidate, Betty Yee, who is polling in the mid-single-digits, said she believed there should be human safety operators even in autonomous taxis, like Waymo, bringing up the December power outage in San Francisco that caused some cars in the fleet to freeze up when traffic lights went out.

“For something like that, where you’re really posing a danger to pedestrians and other drivers, absolutely” there should be safety drivers, Yee said in an interview.

Union members, including Finn’s Teamsters, showed up to a San Francisco hearing earlier this week on Waymos during the blackout. They held a rally and signs emblazoned with “Driverless is Dangerous” seeking to use the issue as a cudgel in their safety arguments against AVs.

Gonzalez, the labor leader, acknowledged there were no guarantees, even when candidates make promises on the campaign trail, adding “Somebody could get in and change their position.”