Giving Birth to Driverless: Labor Troubles

Perhaps total jobs in transportation will not be lost, BUT how anyone can say with a straight face that driving jobs will not be reduced and then disappear is mind boggling. Maybe I missed the learning-to-deceive day in the third grade. Trucking representatives and now a transit system assure lawmakers and tell labor that they will continue to employ as many drivers as they currently do.

Please.

To all of you:

• taxi and ride hailing drivers
• truck drivers
• shuttle drivers
• delivery van drivers
• postal carrier drivers

Focus on plan B, whether that is going back to school, starting a new business, getting a different job, or figuring out if there will be another position with your current - driving-oriented - employer. The autonomous revolution is coming soon.

Writing on the wall

If drivers or their unions doubt those words, they should open their eyes. Message to labor: Look at what happened to the taxi industry when Uber and Lyft arrived with a better product; look at all the record stores that have disappeared; ask how many 22 year olds use a clock radio alarm or have a landline phone. That's your future, not the utter BS that trucking and now transit are dishing out.

Who is dishing?

The obfuscation comes from the HART transit system in Jacksonville, FL. Florida lawmakers and pubic facilities have been in the forefront of driverless. HART will do a pilot with autonomous shuttles.

Except for one county commissioner who talked job training, the powers that be decided that they would respond to legitimate labor concerns with hedging. That's my read; I realize there is another, more reasonable conclusion here. These are two quotes from a St. Peters Blog post.

“Drivers are vitally important,” said HART board chairman. “I don’t think we’re going to have a system where employees aren’t driving buses. That’s not going to happen,” he insisted.  

HART CEO Katharine Eagan said that “depending on who you ask,” it will be anywhere between two to thirty years before autonomous vehicle technology will arrive at a point where a driver still needs to be monitoring a steering wheel.

Wanted: objective assessment of employment consequences

Two federal lawmakers, both New Englanders - a Republican senator from Maine and a Democratic senator from Rhode Island - are asking the GAO (the U.S. Government Accountability Office) for a report about the predicted employment fallout that vehicles with autonomous technology will cause. They are looking for estimates of timing for autonomous trucking and other widespread rollouts and analysis of what autonomous driving will mean for employment.

National Driverless Committees - Relevant?

Perhaps I am snarky, DC-based, and cynical, but my general opinion is that the committee discussed below will not accomplish much and the private sector will continue to drive - no pun intended - the future of autonomous transportation. This will be so particularly in the Donald Administration with its crew of pro-business advisors and Cabinet secretaries. Even in the outgoing Administration, I have witnessed this kind of pattern with the ride hailing companies as well. 

Lots of news here about:

• An excellent report about autonomous vehicles and their potential for people with disabilities, and
• State legislation and possibilities

Sounds like Eh Cat!

In the world of DC acronyms, here is a new one: ACAT, or the Advisory Committee on Automation in Transportation, a committee created by the US Department of Transportation. It is made up of very high people, such as the CEO of GM, for example. I'm convinced that the reason why the word automation is used instead of autonomous, driverless, or the equivalent is to make sure that only people who know that ACAT exists will find information about it on the  website, a notorious labyrinth of unconnected webpages. But I am paranoid. 

Here is the list of committee members. Lots of CEOs, professors, auto, and tech members. Last I would mention the token representative of the disability community and one labor representative. Oh and Lisa Jackson, ex-EPA Administrator and a representative of Apple, but perhaps that was the Obama Administration's parting DOT gift to the new DOT leadership. It would not look good to either disband ACAT or to throw off Jackson.

Since this is a government-created committee, it must adhere to US open meetings laws. On the positive side, any slob can attend or live stream a meeting, such as the Jan. 17, 2017 ACAT meeting, but on the down side none of the corporate bigwigs ever say anything forthright or unexpected because press is present and any person can live stream and sip their coffee at the same time (assuming the multitudes of transportation nerds are sipping the same beverage I am and prefer to view such events in jeans or pajamas). 

Mayor Garcetti was the only one to push the group forward and offer a plea for real action - a blueprint with measurable, planned goals - and hope that the committee will do something significant. And he was not even in the room; he called in from LA, where it was an early 7-9 a.m. Pacific time.

Some tidbits 

• The labor representative showed concern, as well he should. Remember the elevator operators once had a union and jobs. 
• The FAA's committee on airborne drones was cited as a successful example of a government advisory committee. 
• The guy from Zoox was the only one not to wear a professional uniform; he showed up in a hat and a sweater (and pants, of course).

Potential is the word for people with disabilities

A nice report by Henry Claypool, the sole member of ACAT representing people with disabilities or having one himself, has co-authored a frank report for about the potential scenarios for people with disabilities as ride hailing services progress and driverless transportation looms just over the horizon.The report, entitled Self-Driving Cars: The Impact on People with Disabilities and issued the day after the ACAT meeting, goes beyond cars to look at current ride hailing, paratransit, taxi, street network and transit inequities - more than 25 years after passage of the ADA - and the sunny and gloomy scenarios that are possible when driverless transportation arrives. 

Claypool and his co-authors strongly encourage the formation of an active coalition of groups representing people with disabilities and others to educate political and business leaders about the needs of this transportation-challenged and diverse population and to advocate for universal design solutions for the new vehicles. 

Claypool  and his co-authors rightly declare that the opportunity is now to get it right - meaning equitable - for all travelers instead of standing by and allowing current problems, such as those that the ADA did not solve, to continue. 

This is an excellent and in-depth report about an important aspect of the coming transportation revolution. The Ruderman Family Foundation and SAFE (Securing America's Future Energy, a bipartisan think tank) supported the production of the report.

(FYI: This is high praise. Most reports on autonomous vehicles are basically driverless-for-dummies productions, make completely speculative declarations based on huge assumptions, or both.) 

Smart Belt - some PR person said it's better than Rust Belt

Starting with the self-congratulatory name of the Smart Belt, some previously Rust Belt states are ganging up together for a better chance to obtain federal funds and to lead the way together - well somewhat together - in the race toward driverless. Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are cooperatively pushing their impressive array of government and academic partners for the testing, research of, and presumably, wide introduction of driverless transportation. Focus areas also include policy, funding and freight issues.

East, then down south and west

Maryland's Motor Vehicle Administration (the DMV equivalent for any New Yorkers) is advocating for its prominent role in driverless regulation, perhaps seeing ahead that it will have much less to do once there are no drivers. The MVA Administrator testified in Annapolis, the state capital, in favor of a bill that would give her agency broad flexibility. She also wants testing of driverless in the state. 

Alabama is worried that without drivers there will be a huge reduction in state funds. There won't be drivers speeding, failing to put on lights, going over lane markings or anything else. When your state coffers depend on driver fees and penalties, it is worrisome to think there will not be any drivers. So Alabama is exploring legislative approaches via its Legislative Committee on Self Driving Vehicles, considering laws dealing with vehicles, insurance, and funding programs. 

Transit-friendly Texas? 

Texas has promoted itself as a business-friendly state and it continues this tradition with the state's efforts to enable driverless testing - in Houston on highways. The auto makers welcome this endeavor, but so do some freight players and Houston's public transit agency, which is also involved. (I admit that as a native New Yorker I do not also associate transit with Texas, but Houston recently did a nice job of rethinking its bus routes in a very inclusive process.)

To Unions: Let's Start Job Training Now

Driverless vehicles - including buses, taxis, and trucks - are coming in a few years. This is a fact, an inevitable revolution about to take place. At some point, the vast majority of human drivers will lose their jobs, whether that comes after union negotiations or at the end of a long contract or whether it is the immigrant Uber or taxi driver being giving the shaft at the end of his shift. 

Driver unions can help their members. I hope some politician somewhere powerful can assist those drivers without a union or any worker protections. 

Just saying no will not work

However, unions merely declaring that driverless won't happen or that human drivers do so much more than drive and therefore should not lose their jobs - these might stall the inevitable, but they will ultimately be losing arguments.

And the first arguments are just being spouted. An article from Vancouver, shows that the Translink drivers' union and Translink itself are the first in North America to be arguing labor rights as a reason to reject driverless transit. 

Their energies would be better spent considering and providing job training to the thousands of drivers who will be out of a job. 

Remember actual shoe stores, airlines with good service (outside of first class), small hardware and electronics stores and restaurants before cheap no-frills big box stores and fast food took over? Fortunately or unfortunately, cheap service - that means driverless vehicles without wage and benefits drivers - will also win out. I just hope we remember to replace this step on the economic ladder and to protect those who will be mid-career when they lose their livelihoods.

O' Henry in Australia

This is already happening in a Chinese and Japanese-owned mine in Australia. All vehicles working in the mine are driverless. According to an article from down under, these bot trucks do not get bored and make mistakes. They also eliminate accidents of humans and vehicles working side by side or inside of the the vehicles. [Editor's note: I had trouble getting to the article the second time. Seems the publication prefers readers to be subscribers and not those just occasionally interested in reading a local article.]

Sunshine state

Not everyone is thinking of the unionized drivers or their unrepresented brethren (and sisters). Florida, for example, is doing whatever it can to attract the vehicles and the companies working on them, including hosting an annual autonomous vehicle summit, now in its third year. Here's a video of a self-driving Army vehicle. And an article with more summit details. Okay and a second video below.

Challenges - Inside Baseball Technology, Labor, and ART

The chief of the British mail service has caught quite a bit of flack for her excitement about driverless trucks and drones. Labor responded harshly, not with actual facts about such technology, or with complaints about loss of jobs, but with brouhaha about the many challenges before driverless vehicles will be ready to roam the streets.

Personally, I think labor would be better off directly expressing its deep concern about jobs than attacking a high-ranking civil servant.  Like the trains and cars of the last two centuries, the driverless industry will vastly impact the next one. Labor should best concentrate on education and retraining for new jobs rather than vitriol.

Sensory limitations of driverless "eyesight"

The New York Times has a nice article that simply explains current obstacles to the widespread use of self-driving vehicles. Specifically, the article discusses what a vehicles "eyes" or sensors must "see" and be programmed to respond to. And, as the article points out, there will be surprises - and accidents - no matter how refined the technology. Most likely, far fewer accidents than with human drivers.

The article has an artistic focus as well, but, to be frank, it did not inspire me.

Now here is art

I  happen to like the look of cute rounded-rectangular driverless pods or bots or whatever you want to call the emerging class of self-driving vehicles, but there is a new shape on the horizon. A triangle, specifically a triangular self-driving bike that requires a human to pedal, but not to navigate. I'm thinking reading or watching a movie while pedaling and the techno-gizmo part of the tricycle decides where to turn and where to stop. Oh, and these are meant for bikeshare programs.

Very cool.

Pretty design counts

Google has a fun side and it is currently being expressed on the sides of its driverless cars. Cute designs resulted from a contest in California. Skyline, nature, people. So un-boring.

Outside design is not the only part of the driverless future that inspires. One writer talks of living in a driverless Winnebago, roaming around, sleeping while in traffic, not needing to be place specific. We can return to the nomadic lifestyle, but with our house vehicles always with us.

Truck Drivers Get Shot of Anxiety

The Daimler debut of the driverless Freightliner Inspiration Truck, albeit only for testing, is already causing anxiety for professional truck drivers. They are the first set of people who make a living from driving who are expressing what most proponents of driverless vehicles know is coming - that human drivers will not be needed. These workers probably have 10 years. I'm also guessing that the Daimler truck, envisioning a human aboard, will be, at most, an interim phase, before trucks have no one aboard.

This does not make the Teamsters Union happy. Their tactic is to foster uncertainty about driverless trucks. That strategy did not get them anywhere in manufacturing, which has heavily automated, and it will not save any jobs for drivers, in my personal opinion.

Now for all those whose work depends on brains

Any high-level cognitive worker should stop chuckling now. Your job will soon be threatened as well. MIT has developed underwater exploration robots that decide how to perform certain aspects of their work and they can perform cooperatively with other robots. Now that we all have anxiety, maybe we should all consider opening those artisnal cupcake shops and distilleries.

Parents have different attitudes

Parents look at the driverless future a different way. They would like to see automation in cars that keeps their sometimes irresponsible teenage children safe, despite themselves. They want to see speed-limited cars, geographic range limits, curfew guarantors, and even a system that restricts the number of passengers. If you have ever waited up at night to hear the car in the driveway or the key turn the lock, you would understand.