Since its founding, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters has been an adaptable labor union, evolving alongside technological progress and helping to usher in a new era of transportation. Charting a new, obstructionist course for their organization, Teamsters in California now seek to block the latest technological revolution in transportation.
On August 5, Teamsters California filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in Alameda Superior Court. The Teamsters claimed the DMV skipped a procedural requirement to conduct a Standardized Regulatory Impact Assessment when it adopted rules in April 2026 to allow autonomous trucks over 10,000 pounds on California’s roadways.
The Teamsters have framed the DMV’s actions as intentionally devious, claiming it kept the public in the dark while putting more than 200,000 drivers’ jobs at risk for an unproven technology. While the Teamsters’ point about the DMV missing a procedural step may have merit, their request for a complete repeal of the April regulations would set California even further back in adopting a technology that shows great promise.
Founded between 1901 and 1903, the original Teamsters organization protected the interests of horse-drawn carriage drivers. Early in their history, members faced a new technology that threatened to make their horse-centric skills obsolete: the automobile. Despite the challenges presented by motorized transport, the early Teamsters did not fight the innovation. Instead, they organized around its adoption, expanding their membership categories to include car drivers, retraining horse-team drivers, and helping write the new rules of the road for the automotive future.
They changed their name in 1909, adding “Chauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers” to signify the adaptation to the societal changes driven by technological progress. The Teamsters own founding story provides a strong case study in organized labor adoption and shaping a technological transition rather than resisting it.
Beyond breaking from their own organization’s history, the Teamsters lawsuit is an opportunistic attempt to block innovation. It claims that the DMV failed to conduct a study, yet their lawsuit doesn’t ask for the missing study to be produced or for California to establish a process to avoid a procedural oversight in the future. Instead, the Teamsters are looking for a full rollback to the pre-April ban on autonomous trucking.
The language the Teamsters are using publicly is unrelated to their dispute over a procedural mishap at the DMV. They are repeatedly invoking public safety arguments about the “80,000-pound driverless cars on our roads,” seeking to stoke fears about new technology to gain public support for their lawsuit. Their public language is simply being used to conceal a labor protection argument. While the Teamsters of the early 20th century sought a seat at the table, the current Teamsters are simply looking to flip the table and storm out.
This is not a niche issue for Californians, as California has significant port and warehouse infrastructure that is extremely dependent on freight efficiency. As the only state prohibiting the technology prior to the April decision, California already lags behind other states in the adoption of autonomous trucking.
If California chooses to roll back the clock and reinstate a full ban on autonomous trucking, then residents must be aware of the competitive costs associated with that choice. Over 30 other states currently permit testing and deployment of the technology, and live autonomous commercial freight routes already exist across the country. A court-ordered repeal of autonomous trucking does nothing to protect California’s truck drivers over the long term. The industry will simply move elsewhere, leaving Teamsters with no say about the future of freight in their state.
The real fix to this situation is to enact a federal framework that supersedes the state-by-state patchwork of regulations on autonomous vehicles. The current landscape of conflicting state regulations classifies trucks that are legal in one state as illegal in others. The House of Representatives has put forth the SELF DRIVE Act — the first version of a federal autonomous vehicle framework that includes heavy trucks. Sponsored by Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio, and Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Michigan, the bipartisan bill would establish clear and consistent national safety standards for all autonomous vehicles. Both sides would get what they claim to want, and the path toward technological progress would remain open.
The DMV made a mistake and needs to deliver its study, but California must avoid letting a paperwork dispute become a de facto ban on the technology. California can’t afford to surrender its role in shaping the future of freight just because the Teamsters chose to break with tradition and fight progress.Mark Dalton is the Senior Policy Director for Technology and Innovation at the R Street Institute.