Union pushes back against bill blocking municipalities from banning autonomous cars
Image | Courtesy of Ella Adams, State House News Service
Union members and drivers rally at the State House on Tuesday about driverless vehicle legislation on Beacon Hill.
Labor unions rallied at the State House on Tuesday against legislation that would usher driverless cars into Massachusetts as industry voices touted the vehicles' safety and efficiency just hours later.
There would be 70,000 app-based drivers and tens of thousands of Teamsters truck, transport and delivery drivers displaced from their jobs if autonomous vehicles without human operators take to the roads in Massachusetts, according to Greater Boston Labor Council AFL-CIO President Darlene Lombos.
"First of all, the tech is not there. We've seen so many issues in other states and cities that they're already operating in," Lombos told the News Service. "Number two, there has been no impact study done on any kind of impacts on environment, workers, community, the safety issues around our roads — there has been no study around that, even though they say they've been testing, there's been no public process around having driverless cars here."
Beacon Hill is pondering the future of driverless cars. Legislation (H 3634 / S 2379) supported by the industry and opposed by unions would establish a "regulatory framework" for autonomous vehicles to be deployed and create an autonomous vehicle network in Massachusetts.
Filed by Reps. Daniel Cahill and Natalie Blais and Sen. William Driscoll, the bills would enable the state to create and issue licenses for operating fully autonomous vehicles. The "autonomous driving system" would be considered the vehicle's driver for the purpose of traffic laws and road safety. Driverless operators would have to prove the vehicles have insurance before operating.
There would be no "municipal prohibitions" on autonomous vehicles under the legislation "to prevent a patchwork approach from emerging," according to a Senate bill summary.
"Today, 25 states have enacted bills similar to House Bill 3634, which is necessary before companies like Waymo can operate in any state. Without this regulatory framework in place, Massachusetts will continue to lose out on the life-saving, economic benefits autonomous vehicles are already providing across the country," Waymo State Policy Director Matt Walsh said at a Transportation Committee hearing Tuesday afternoon.
Walsh said Waymo "frequently" brings its vehicles to new cities for testing purposes and has been driving its vehicles manually for the last several weeks in Boston. Waymo is owned by Alphabet, the parent company of Google.
A coalition of drivers and union members are making the case for the value of human drivers, who they say can appropriately respond in certain passenger situations in ways driverless vehicles cannot. Driverless ride share services would also increase traffic congestion, human drivers claim.
"A lot of drivers right now are making a living, an honest living, doing Uber, putting food on the table," Chiem Klot, an Uber driver of nine years, told the News Service. Klot drives 60 to 80 hours a week and said he has dealt with picking up people who are in dangerous or emergency situations.
"I had a guy who got in my car. He was bleeding everywhere. He had a towel and then a metal object impaled into his neck. So I rushed him to the emergency room, ran every red light just to get him there," Klot said. "Besides that, I've driven women that [were] about to have a baby in my car — getting them where they need to go, to the emergency room."
Klot continued, "As an Uber driver, we don't just bring someone from point A to point B. We deal with responsibility, and we react to situations like this that Waymo can't do at all."
Watertown Rep. Steve Owens, who spoke at the union rally Tuesday and sits on the Joint Committee on Transportation, is sponsoring the House version of legislation (H 3669 / S 2393) that is supported by unions and would require a human operator to be physically present in autonomous vehicles transporting commerce or passengers Massachusetts.
"This isn't just about jobs, either. You cannot teach empathy or instinct to an autonomous vehicle," Teamsters Local 25 Secretary-Treasurer Steve South said. "So much about being safe on the roads is about being able to make split-second decisions using common sense — something driverless cars and trucks are nowhere close to mastering."
The industry voices opposing Owens' bill and supporting driverless vehicles taking root in Massachusetts said the vehicles are reducing the frequency and severity of collisions. According to Waymo's Walsh, "the Waymo driver has reduced airbag deployment crashes by 79% and lowered serious injury-causing crashes by 88% compared to humans driving the same distance."
Unions rebuke those claims, pointing to product recalls on Waymo vehicles, accidents and a federal investigation into traffic safety and crashes.
"We know what's at stake: thousands of good union jobs, the ability to support our families and the consequences of letting big tech rush on and unleash a fleet of machines on our street without regard for the safety and stability of our communities," Mike Vartabedian, assistant directing business representative for District 15 of International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, said.
"We are not against technology, but we are against corporate greed disguised as innovation. We refuse to let Silicon Valley make decisions behind closed doors while the people who do the work are not at the table," Vartabedian continued.
The Chamber of Progress, a tech trade group, called on lawmakers Tuesday to take policy a step further and remove from the industry-backed legislation the requirement that driverless trucks include human operators. Brianna January, the group's Northeast state and local government relations director, said autonomous vehicles also offer "independence" for certain communities who have traditionally lacked it, like the disabled, the blind and vision impaired, the elderly and immunocompromised.
"Requiring the human driver voids the usefulness of AVs for the communities that for medical and personal reasons, may not be able to or want to have another person present inside a vehicle," January said.
Walsh added that Waymo's automated driving system, which drives more than one million miles on a weekly basis, is boosting efficiency. A panel of pedestrian, bicycle and environmental experts on Tuesday argued the state's climate and infrastructure plans do not account for the impact of that mileage, and that the vehicles' software bias could endanger some pedestrians.
Autonomous vehicles also would not be subject to the extensive data reporting requirements or fees that apply to transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft, according to Pete Wilson, policy director for Transportation for Massachusetts.
"This bill does not include any data reporting requirements for AVs, and Section 11 specifically bans state agencies, municipalities, political subdivisions or local entities from imposing any taxes, fees or other requirements, including performance standards, specific to the operation of fully autonomous vehicles," Wilson said.
Walsh said if Waymo were to come to Massachusetts, "We would be complying with the same TNC fees once we were — if we were registered as a TNC in the state."
0 Comments