What you must learn about Question 3 on the Massachusetts ballot

policy

The controversy surrounding ride-sharing corporations within the state has been at the middle of conversations in recent times. From confiscating illegal mopeds to calling on corporations to implement secure driving practices to problems with staff' rights, debates about this burgeoning industry proceed.

In November, Massachusetts voters will consider one other query: Should drivers be allowed to form unions to bargain collectively with transportation corporations like Uber and Lyft?

Currently, drivers at each corporations – unlike in most other state-run jobs – don’t have the chance to form a union. Voting query 3 goals to vary this.

If the referendum is approved, drivers would need to collect signatures from at the very least 25% of energetic drivers or those that have made greater than the typical variety of trips within the last six months to form a union.

If a union is then formed, the state monitors the union negotiations and approves the negotiated recommendations on wages, social advantages and dealing conditions.

The initiative would also create a hearing process for the Massachusetts Employment Relations Board to deal with allegations of unfair labor practices against the ride-sharing corporations.

“Over the past two years, Uber and Lyft drivers in Massachusetts have exposed the gig economy for what it is: an exploitative model that is all about defrauding workers, consumers and taxpayers alike,” Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President April Verrett said in an announcement: “Drivers know that the best antidote to the sub-minimum wages, unfair layoffs and unsafe working conditions in their industry is the opportunity to work with a union to negotiate better standards.”

How did we get here?

Earlier this 12 months, Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and Instacart funded an industry-backed voting committee called Flexibility and advantages for drivers in MassachusettsHad this measure been implemented, the app-based drivers would have remained independent contractors.

It would even have set a minimum earnings limit of 120 percent of the federal minimum wage, or $18 per hour in 2023, excluding suggestions. Drivers would even have received health advantages, staff' compensation insurance and paid sick leave.

The popular initiative got here after the Attorney General Lawsuit filed before the Suffolk Supreme Court in 2020, in search of a ruling on whether Uber and Lyft drivers are employees under Massachusetts wage and hour laws and due to this fact entitled to advantages and protections.

The lawsuit questioned whether ride-sharing drivers are independent contractors or employees.

The case was regulated and thus ended the businesses' electoral initiative.

“Our settlement with Uber and Lyft secured an unprecedented package of minimum wage, benefits and protections for workers,” Attorney General Andrea Campbell said in an announcement after the ruling. “This is a strong foundation that can and should be built upon.”

Campbell endorsed Question 3, which was supported by SEIU.

The attorney general appears to be on par with most voters in Massachusetts. The ballot initiative committee United for Justice, backed by 32BJ SEIU, commissioned a poll of 500 likely voters in September 2023. It found that two-thirds of the state's voters support the fitting of Uber and Lyft drivers to form unions.

Uber is currently discussing Question 3 with its drivers and said in an announcement: “We are not aware of any other place in the world where half of the workers do not have the right to choose their representative.”

Lyft has not commented on the proposed vote.

What the local union says

According to Roxana Rivera, assistant to the president of 32BJ SEIU, working conditions have only gotten worse in the course of the years Uber and Lyft have operated in Massachusetts.

Rivera says the drivers earn less and assume all of the liability and responsibility of a driver.

“The only way for drivers to hold these companies accountable is for them to form a union themselves, bargain collectively and address the problems they face every day,” Rivera said in a phone call with Boston.com.

It's not only the pay that's unfair, she said.

Despite working 12-hour days, six or seven days every week, many drivers within the state still struggle to make ends meet. Many have already invested a major amount in purchasing a automobile. When they change into unemployed, often for unknown reasons, they’ll easily fall into debt, in response to Rivera.

“These problems are not just affecting individuals, but entire communities, because here in Massachusetts there are tens of thousands of drivers,” she said. “It's affecting our entire community and especially immigrant and community of color communities.”

In the past, SEIU has helped Home childcare and residential care providers the fitting to form trade unions.

Now they’re striving to introduce this right for all transport drivers across the country.

“It's an evolving industry,” Rivera said, and one that can proceed to vary rapidly. “To keep up with enforcement and change, the driving forces need power on their side to counter these global corporations.”