Page 18 THE REVERE ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2024 By Bob Katzen If you have any questions about this week’s report, e-mail us at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com or call us at (617) 720-1562 THE HOUSE AND SENATE. There were no roll calls in the House or Senate last week. This week, Beacon Hill Roll Call looks at Question 3, one of the fi ve questions on the ballot that will be decided directly by the voters in November. The question asks voters if they approve of a proposed law that would allow drivers for Lyft and Uber, and any other companies that use a digital network to connect riders to drivers for pre-arranged transportation, to collectively bargain to create negotiated recommendations concerning wages, benefi ts and terms and conditions of work. Drivers would not be required to engage in any union activities. Companies would be allowed to form multi-company associations to represent them when negotiating with the union. The state would supervise the labor activities permitted by the proposed law and would have responsibility for approving or disapproving the negotiated recommendations. WHAT SUPPORTERS SAY: “Voting ‘Yes’ on Question 3 is about giving these Massachusetts rideshare drivers what nearly every other worker in the state has: the option to join a union,” Roxana Rivera, co-chair on the Yes on 3 Coalition told Beacon Hill Roll Call “We know this is what our state’s rideshare drivers want. A recent driver survey showed 95 percent support for the option to join a union and Question 3 won’t force any rideshare drivers to join the union if they don’t want to. Seventy percent of voters support Question 3, according to a just-concluded poll of likely 2024 voters. Nationally, unions are more popular than they’ve been in generations.” On its website, the “Vote ‘Yes’ on 3 Committee” says, “The option to join a union is guaranteed for most workers but rideshare drivers don’t have that choice. Drivers are struggling to support their families despite working in a billion-dollar industry. After expenses, they take home less than $15 an hour, the minimum wage, with no protections against arbitrary deactivations that make it impossible to support their families. Vote ‘Yes’ on Question 3 to ensure drivers can challenge these unfair practices.” WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: Paul Craney, a spokesperson for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, told Beacon Hill Roll Call that although the alliance is not a ballot questions committee, “[we] authored the voter guide (red book) summary because we are ideologically opposed to the ballot question and wanted to make sure the voters had both sides of the story available to them before making a decision.” Craney continued, “No group from the aff ected industries has stepped forward to oppose this ballot question. The way this ballot question is currently written potentially violates state and federal labor law and if passed by the voters, would most likely result in a prolonged legal battle before this potential law is changed.” On its website, the alliance says, “The passage of this question will allow state government to set the wages for these private companies, and ultimately force drivers to pay dues into a union they don’t want and that they have little control over. This is possible because this question artifi cially lowers the threshold required to call a unionization vote from the normal 30 percent of employees to just 2.5 percent. Not only is this unfair to drivers, but this is also a violation of long-established federal labor laws and will likely open the state up to lawsuits and litigation in the future, if passed.” OFFICIAL ARGUMENTS: Here are the offi cial arguments, gathered by the secretary of state, for each side of the question. IN FAVOR: Written by Roxana Rivera, United for Justice, www.DriversNeedUnion.org “A ‘Yes’ vote will give Massachusetts rideshare drivers, who work for companies like Uber and Lyft, the option to join a union while also maintaining driver fl exibility and independence. The option to join a union is guaranteed for most workers but rideshare drivers currently don’t have that choice. Vote ‘Yes’ to allow rideshare drivers the option to choose a union.” AGAINST: Written by Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, www.massfi scal.org “Drivers and riders urge ‘No’ on Question 3 which would raise the prices for all riders, funding union pockets, not drivers’ pockets. This law gives politicians the right to set rules with no accountability and creates a new radical labor category that is inconsistent with federal labor law. Drivers in Massachusetts already receive base [pay] of $32.50 per hour with yearly increases; paid sick leave; paid family medical leave; healthcare stipend; on-thejob injury insurance; anti-discrimination protections; domestic violence leave; anti-retaliation protections; and an appeals process. Question 3 does not really create bargaining for workers. Drivers will have no control over leadership of the union and will pay signifi cant dues without real representation. This proposal is not fair to drivers and allows just 2.5 percent of drivers to force unionization and leaves many drivers without a voice.” ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL DON’T MISS THIS HEALTH CARE EVENT — The Steward Health Care bankruptcy has shocked Massachusetts’ healthcare system, creating challenges and raising questions about the future of primary care, urgent care and behavioral health. On Oct. 30, join top executives, legislative leaders, regulators and advocates for a discussion on the system’s vulnerabilities and potential policy solutions at the Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) Conference Center in Boston. This event is hosted by the State House News Service and MASSterList. For More information and/or to register: https://www.eventbrite. com/e/urgent-treatmentmass-health-care-after-steward-tickets-1038286622237? aff =oddtdtcreator CLIMATE AND ENERGY BILL — Rep. Jeff Roy (D-Franklin) and Sen. Mike Barrett (D-Lexington), cochairs of the Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy, announced that their conference committee is fi nalizing details of a compromise version of diff erent versions of House and Senate bills that make changes in the comprehensive climate and clean energy siting and permitting practices. “We are proud to announce that we have reached an agreement in principle that resolves the differences between the House and Senate versions of the comprehensive climate and clean energy siting and permitting legislation,” said Roy and Barrett in a joint statement. “Massachusetts must continue to be a national leader in the eff ort to combat climate change, a prerequisite for which will be transitioning to a clean energy economy and creating high-quality jobs in the process. That’s why our respective teams are working diligently to fi le the conference report in the coming days, with the goal of sending these critical reforms to the governor’s desk for her signature as soon as possible.” “Gov. Healey is excited that the Legislature has reached an agreement on this critical climate bill that will strengthen Massachusetts’ global leadership in creating clean energy jobs and reducing costs,” a spokesperson for Healey said. “She looks forward to receiving it.” “For Massachusetts to truly be a leader on climate change, equitable siting reform and curbing the expansion and overspending in our gas system must be priorities for lawmakers,” said Caitlin Peale Sloan, Vice President of the Conservation Law Foundation Massachusetts. “We’re eager to see what is included in this bill and will continue to advocate for the necessary changes to slash climate-damaging pollution, meet our climate targets and ensure new clean energy infrastructure avoids burdening those of low to moderate-income and communities of color.” $19.2 MILLION FOR PREPAREDNESS AGAINST TERRORIST ACTS — The Healey administration announced that state agencies and Regional Homeland Security Advisory Councils representing all areas of Massachusetts will receive $19.2 million to strengthen the state’s resilience and preparedness against terrorist acts. “This grant program allows our administration to identify evolving threats to our state and invest in measures to be better prepared to prevent and respond to threats and critical incidents,” said Gov. Maura Healey. “We’re grateful to the Biden-Harris Administration for prioritizing the safety of our communities through these investments.” “Preparedness is our greatest protection against threats,” said Public Safety and Security Secretary Terrence Reidy. “Collaboration across all levels of government combined with the necessary funding ensure that our cities and towns are prepared to respond and equipped to prevent potential emergencies. This grant is critical to safeguarding our com
19 Publizr Home