View as Webpage

Dear Brothers and Sisters,


The City Council is holding a hearing on a bill, Int 276, sponsored by City Councilman Shekar Krishnan, that will give Uber and Lyft drivers first-time rights under the law to stop unfair deactivations!!!


This bill is what we have been organizing for - it gives drivers real power to fight deactivations - and even lockouts! - and end the pain and devastation of paying $60,000-$80,000 to go to work without any job security.


So, of course - Uber, Lyft and it's agents want to kill the bill and leave drivers without rights and protections under the law! See below for FACT CHECK on Uber-funded IDG's email about Int 276.


Council Members need to hear from drivers in order for us to win Int 276 and end the abuse of unfair deactivations! Join the Council hearing - the necessary step before they can vote to pass the bill:


END UNFAIR DEACTIVATIONS! PASS INT 276!

City Council Transportation Committee Public Hearing

Friday, September 27th at 9AM Sharp

at Broadway and Murray (City Hall)


What Int 276 does:

  • Puts burden of proof on Uber and Lyft in deactivation cases - not on the drivers!
  • Requires Uber and Lyft to follow standard for good cause if they are going to deactivate drivers.
  • Requires Uber and Lyft , in most cases, to give written 14-days notice before deactivating drivers, explaining the reasons for deactivation and informing drivers of the right to challenge their deactivation
  • Drivers can file a complaint with a city agency to prosecute unfair deactivation and be heard in court!
  • Drivers will have independent appeal process not controlled by the companies!
  • Uber/Lyft must engage in "progressive discipline" meaning the serious punishment of a deactivation must fit the violation and drivers must have been made aware of behavior which the companies consider to be a violation
  • Allows drivers to get reinstatement and backpay (your lost earnings for the time you were deactivated) if deactivated without good cause
  • Drivers deactivated over the past 6 years from the date the bill goes into effect would have one year to independently appeal their cases. 
  • Defines lockouts that total 72 hours over 180 day period as a deactivation - that means, you will be able to appeal lockouts just like any other deactivation, and the companies will have to prove they are justified.

Uber and its agents are trying to kill the bill

Uber and Lyft of course do not want this bill.  Uber-funded IDG is also trying to kill Int 276. 


See below for a line-by-line FACT CHECK on IDG's email to drivers about Int 276:

FACT CHECK!

Fact Check #1

IDG: “(Int 276)…threatens the hard-fought grievance process that protects drivers..”


TRUTH: Int. 276 does not require that IDG stop or even change whatever grievance process they may already have.


IDG - and any drivers who want to! - can still use it and all drivers will also get the benefits of notice before a deactivation and an explanation about why they were deactivated.


Fact Check #2

IDG: “(Int 276) is a direct attack on organized labor and the protections we’ve won..”


TRUTH: How was the “grievance process” won?


IDG has been “significantly funded” by Uber, which agreed to set up a driver appeal process back in 2016.


After eight years, there is very little public information about this process, and it is unclear what standard drivers have to meet to get reactivated.


Int. 276, on the other hand, includes clear, transparent standards the company must meet for a deactivation to be valid, and the companies must prove what they say happened.


Fact Check #3

IDG: “..current driver-led system…”


TRUTH: How is the IDG process driver-led? Uber’s website says Uber gets the final say about who can participate in IDG’s process.


Uber says that “determination of eligibility” to participate in the appeal process “will be determined by Uber on a case-by-case basis.”


Meanwhile, Int. 276 allows all deactivations to be challenged.


Fact Check #4

IDG: “80% of drivers deactivated by Uber or Lyft who come to us get back to work – most within a week.”


TRUTH: Unfortunately, every driver knows that a real firing doesn’t get resolved in a week, if it ever does. However, Uber says most of its deactivations are because of issues like expired paperwork, which can be resolved in a week, by simply uploading the right documents. Is that who is being counted in IDG’s email?


Fact Check #5

IDG: The city bill would let Uber and Lyft off the hook and replace this with a weaker process run by a city agency that leaves drivers to fend for themselves.”


TRUTH: Int 276 does not let Uber or Lyft off the hook -- in fact, it puts the burden of proving they deactivated drivers for a fair reason on Uber and Lyft!


IDG doesn’t say anything about the details of their process or why it’s stronger than Int. 276, and information about IDG’s process and its legal standards are not public. For example, Uber often says safety-related or “zero-tolerance” deactivations are ineligible for appeal–but there is no clear guidance on what that means, and when drivers even have a right to begin this process.


What we do know is that Int. 276:

  • Will require the companies to give you notice before they deactivate you in most cases, so you can try to resolve the issue before you get deactivated.
  • Will require the companies to try to resolve the issue with you quickly, before the hearing process, if you choose.
  • Creates a clear and transparent standard for what the companies have to do and prove before they fire you.
  • Gives you several different ways to appeal the deactivation, through arbitration, going to court, or working with the city agency to file a complaint, so you can choose what works best for you.
  • Has strong penalties, including backpay (getting paid back for money that you lost while you were deactivated if you win your case).


Fact Check #6

IDG: “Worse yet, the city bill has a loophole that would let Uber and Lyft force drivers to “opt out” of any appeals process at all!”


TRUTH: IDG is lying. There is no loophole where Uber and Lyft can “opt out” of an appeal.


The only way for the companies to avoid an appeal is for you to reach an agreement–like getting back to work on the app– with the companies before the appeal begins.


If you don’t like the agreement the company offers before the appeal, you just say no and go to the appeal process! Getting you back to work as soon as possible without waiting for an arbitration or a trial is not a loophole.

 

Fact Check #7

IDG: Drivers would be forced into a complex, two-tiered system run by the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection DCWP, leaving most without proper representation, especially those unfamiliar with city bureaucracy.


TRUTH: Drivers won’t be forced into anything–you will get to choose to deal with your deactivation however you want, including through whatever IDG’s current process is.


You will still have the right to representation, and there is simply no two-tiered system. Every driver has been subject to an unfair deactivation or knows someone who has been.


The current IDG process, whatever it is, is simply not enough to protect drivers.


Why would a group that says it advocates for drivers be spreading lies about a bill that will give more rights to drivers, while leaving whatever process they currently have untouched?


Click here to see Int 276 

https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6557685&GUID=B1AD10BE-3B1B-4782-8AE8-65B9C1E20563


Chart below: line by line FACT CHECK of IDG's misleading email to drivers about Intro 276 - a bill that will end unfair deactivations and give drivers real power and protections for job security!

END HIGH FHV RENTAL RATES!


FHV Lease Drivers: Join the Council hearing this Friday at 9:00AM to be heard on a bill to regulate the maximum cap to limit the amount leasing companies can charge drivers! We expect leasing companies and their allies to oppose the bill. The Council needs to hear from the drivers!


In 2019, our union worked with City Councilman Francisco Moya on a bill to put a maximum cap to limit the amount FHV leasing companies can charge FHV drivers. Our union fought for and won lease caps for yellow cab drivers for daily, weekly leasing and also for Driver-Owned-Vehicle operators who lease the medallion and buy the car from brokers. Why should a Camry that's painted black and not yellow but used for TLC purposes not have a regulated maximum rental rate?


Uber and even TLC have used high rental rates as an excuse to lift the vehicle cap with no limits, flooding the streets and leaving all drivers - both car owners and lease drivers - with less and less income and crushing lockouts. Even if there was no cap on FHV plates, the reality is, drivers who would still choose to lease have a right to not be exploited by leasing companies.


Click here to see a PDF of Int 323

SIGN AND SHARE THE UBER/LYFT DRIVER STRIKE PLEDGE TO GET TO 30,000 SIGNATURES!
BUILD THE UNION THAT FIGHTS AND WINS!
Visit the union's website WWW.NYTWA.ORG
Drivers Serve the World. We Serve the Drivers.
New York Taxi Workers Alliance | 31-10 37th Avenue, Suite 300 (3rd Floor)
Long Island City, NY 11101 | 718-706-9892 | media@nytwa.org | NYTWA.org
Connect with us
Facebook  Twitter  Youtube