Resolution urging the Massachusetts Legislature to oppose H.1234 and the proposed 2022 state ballot initiative. On motion of Councilor Lara, Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilor Arroyo as an original co-sponsor. On motion of Councilors Lara and Arroyo, the rules were suspended; the resolution was adopted.
Borough Council. Murphy Council. All. Docket 0684 will be assigned to the Committee on Government Accountability, Transparency and Accessibility. Mr. Clarke, docket 0685 has been withdrawn. Mr.. Couric, please read. Dr.. 0686, please. Duncan Number 0686 councilors Lara and Louisiana offered a following resolution urging the Massachusetts legislature to oppose Pulse one, two, three, four and the proposed 2022 state ballot initiative. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. The Chair recognizes counsel. LRA counsel. Laura. You have the floor. Thank you, President Flynn. I would like to suspend the rules and add Counselor Arroyo as one of the original co-sponsors. Counsel Arroyo is so, so added as an original co-sponsor counsel. Larry of the floor. Thank you so much, President Flynn. Today we had a couple of dozen app based drivers and workers downstairs with us and elected officials, city councilors and labor leaders from all across the state coming together in support for this resolution. App based companies such as Uber, Lyft and DoorDash are proposing a disruptive ballot question that's going to deny employees vital workplace protections, such as minimum wage, equal pay, paid leave, retirement, workplace safeguards against sexual and racial harassment, unemployment and worker's compensation. Essentially, they're denying all hope of a workplace where people feel respected, protected and well-paid. Undeniably, we've seen that technology has given workers more flexibility through the gig economy. But the price that working people in Boston are paying for those flexible hours is incredibly steep. We are currently in a pivotal moment where the future of work as digital tycoons are building empires on the backs of underpaid workers who are facing escalating housing, food and fuel costs daily. During the pandemic, women accounted for more than 68% of the nation's 2.1 million job losses. And as a result, many of our friends and families turn to the gig economy in record numbers, especially women of color. At Uber, women drivers increased by 80% in the last year. At Uber Eats, the number of women delivery drivers doubled from April 2020 to January 2022. And at Instacart, over 70% of the company's 600,000 drivers are women. So when app based companies like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash propose a disruptive ballot question that would deny employees vital workplace protections, we take it as a direct attack on working women, especially women of color and especially immigrants. Many of our friends and loved ones have turned to these jobs out of necessity to care for their own families and to earn extra cash. And it's been to all of our benefit app based services, help us get dinner on the table, travel home from the doctor's office, and have groceries delivered. At the end of the day, they provide ease and convenience, particularly for working class people, the elderly and disabled who have who heavily rely on these services. They are an asset, but this asset is made possible exclusively by the workers whose rights are going to be put at risk by Proposition 22. The statewide measure is being bankrolled by app based companies, and it's an attempted end run around labor law that would create a permanent underclass of underpaid workers of all ages in every community, but especially in black, brown immigrant communities. Big Tech has already spent 224 million on Proposition 22 in California in a successful attempt to exclude rideshare and other app based workers from workplace protections that are afforded to them under the law. And they plan on spending another 100 million here in Massachusetts. If House Bill 1224 passed is going to create a permanent underclass of low wage, mostly black, brown and immigrant workers, by allowing these companies to pay their workers less than minimum wage and provide few, if any, benefits. The numbers that we're currently looking at range from $4.82 an hour to $6.35 an hour. I'm filing this resolution because I believe that the Boston City Council has a responsibility to prioritize workers over corporate profits, to protect our consumers and oppose any measure that's going to facilitate wage theft and undermine the rights and benefits of the working class people who keep our city running. I'm requesting that we suspend the rules and move for a passage of this resolution today. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. Lara, the chair recognizes counsel. Royal counsel, royal blue of the floor. Thank you, counsel. President Flynn And thank you, counsel Lara, for your leadership here to 2020 to state ballot referendum is essentially asking mass legislators and voters to grant special exemptions from our labor, civil rights and consumer protection laws that are anti-worker, that are anti the rights of our Massachusetts residents who are working in these places, in these gig economies, Uber, Lyft and the different ones that that are partaking. We know that people depend on this work. We know that the current advertising campaign, frankly, to call it what it is, is calling into question that the idea that if we give folks these rights, if we give folks the dignity that they respect as workers, that they should get as workers and the respect they deserve as workers, that we are harming them by removing their flexibility. And I just want to be clear that nothing prevents any of these places from offering flexible schedules or flexible working hours. They are fully able to do that and to continue to provide that flexibility to their workers. The only thing this does is ensure that they're paying into Social Security, that they're paying into unemployment, that they're providing civil rights protections and sexual harassment protections, that they are treating their workers with respect and dignity that they deserve. And so I'm in full throated support for this. It is incredibly important that we stand up for our workers, for folks who are holding it together during much of COVID. Folks were quarantined and ordering their groceries and ordering different things through these apps and relying, frankly, on workers who are putting themselves at risk for very little money and for very little respect from the organizations that they have made very wealthy. And it's important that we change that, that we make sure that that's not the case any longer here in Massachusetts. And so I thank counsel for her leadership here. I think other council colleagues who have stood up on this and have been very loud on this. And I think counsel President Flynn for this moment to share my thoughts. Thank you. Thank you, counselor. L Would anyone like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes counsel. BLOCK. Counsel, block. You have the floor. Thank you so much, Mr. President. And thank you to Counselor Laura for leading on this. And Counselor Arroyo and I think many counselors are united on this front. It was moving to see so many folks, labor allies from across the state outside in front of the building earlier. And I just really want to briefly emphasize that what Counselor Arroyo said about how there's nothing that prevents these big businesses from providing their workers with flexibility within existing Massachusetts labor law. Where they don't like about existing Massachusetts labor law is that we have some of the best protections for workers in the country, and they're trying to undermine those because they know that these are not outside contractors, that they're dictating far too much of people's workday for that to be the case. And they don't like the idea of having to fund all of those protections. So I just want to emphasize, you know, I think, unfortunately, if if we allow this third category to be created in the name of flexibility, when in fact it's just letting people be workers without all of their workers rights, it's going to hugely hurt our rideshare drivers first. And then it's going to be a category that any number of workers in the Commonwealth could then become shunted into and lose a lot of their rights. So I think it's just a super, super important thing for worker power, for all of us to be pushing back on this and and making sure that Massachusetts voters know what it's really about. It's about the rich getting richer. It's about companies that have already basically set public transit and all kinds of other things in their sights and sort of like captured this big transportation market. And now they're trying to have as much of the profit from that as possible go their way and not to the workers who are, in fact, not even just the ones driving, but also the ones bringing the cars and paying the fuel and stuck in terrible leases for a lot of these cars. It's just it's a really exploitative industry. And this question would make it even more exploitative. And it's just something we can't allow. So thank you so much to my colleague and please. Hi, my name. Thank you, Counsel. BLOCK The chair recognizes Counselor Baker. Counselor Baker, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Counselor, for putting this on. Putting this forth over and left. This is not our first fight with them, and I don't think it will be our last state. They have been around for a little while and I was involved pretty heavily in with the taxi drivers. We totally crushed that industry there. And that was mostly an immigrant driven. You know, sort of good American story where you could get it, you could legitimately get a taxi. And earn a living in that in that taxi or one or two of them. So we we lost that battle here. Now, they coming after Kensi was eloquent in what she talked about in in taking away the workers rights. So let's keep an eye on them, because I think ultimately it's about it's about getting rid of those workers and replacing them all with automatic automated vehicles. So but thank you for putting this forward and please. And thank you, Counselor Baker. Anyone else like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes. And anyone else like to add their name. Mr. Clarke, please. I'd. Councilor Baker Council Bar Council President Council of Kolkata Council of Clarity Council, Media Council. Murphy Council were all and pleased that the chair. Councilors Lara and Arroyo seek suspension of the rules and adoption of darkened 0486. All those in favor say aye. All right. All oppose. Say nay. The ayes have it. The resolution has been adopted. We're onto personal orders. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 0687. Duncan Smith 0687. Council of Flynn for Council.