|
Latest News > IC Taxi Drivers in New York Seek Quasi-Union Rights
IC Taxi Drivers in New York Seek Quasi-Union Rights
March 14, 2007
Independent-contractor taxi drivers in New York who are seeking collective negotiating rights similar to what a union provides could well discover that the more incidents of employment one obtains, the more difficult it is to preserve the freedom and other advantages of being an independent contractor.
The Taxi Workers’ Alliance, which represents over 7,000 New York City taxi drivers, has become the first non-union organization to join the New York City Central Labor Council. Because the taxi drivers are independent contractors, the Alliance is not a labor union. It calls itself a “worker center” ostensibly without the power of collective bargaining. Nonetheless, according to the New York Sun, labor leaders anticipate the move will empower the taxi drivers to go on strike and negotiate for health coverage.
The move by the Central Labor Council, whose parent organization is the AFL-CIO, contributes to a blurring of the line between employees and independent contractors and weakens the rights of both groups.
The ability to strike is tantamount to the power of collective bargaining. This is the legitimate right of an employee who may otherwise lack the leverage to negotiate individually with the employer – and may rely on that employer as the sole source of the employee’s income. By contrast, independent contractors, who own or lease the means by which they produce income (in this case, taxi-cabs), already have the right and ability to negotiate the terms of their contract before it is entered into and whenever it comes up for renewal. If the terms are unacceptable they retain the right to seek other clients; there are numerous taxi and car service companies in New York City.
A collective arrangement for independent contractors substitutes the motivations of organizational leaders in lieu of the forces of a free market in determining the value and terms of a contract between two independent parties. In practical terms, this may limit the ability of an individual driver to negotiate a contract which may be acceptable to that individual but not to others in the organization.
Health coverage also falls within the purview of the employer-employee relationship. Taxi drivers, as independent contractors, retain significant rights and freedoms not available to employees, including the right to determine which and how many hours they will work. Since the client (the cab company) cannot tell the contractor (driver) how to do the job, how many hours to work or how much money to make, it seems unfair to require the client to pay for the contractor’s health coverage. Rather, health coverage is a cost of living and doing business and should be taken into consideration by the independent contractor when negotiating compensation in the contract. If clients are forced to pay for the health coverage of their contractors, it is likely they will pass the cost along by offering less compensation across the board, once again limiting the freedom of an independent contractor to negotiate the best terms without regard for the wishes of his or her competitors.
As long as taxi drivers in New York City retain the legal rights and financial benefits of independent contractors, including them in arrangements designed to protect employees will only erode the rights and status of both groups. Moreover, it is likely that nobody explained to the drivers that nothing is for free; that if they seek and obtain the benefits of employee status they ultimately will lose the freedom and other benefits of being an independent contractor, because the two are fundamentally incompatible.
|
