Method of acceptability of risk for owners

In response to what they saw as the Philadelphia Parking Authority

overstepping its role as regulator many of the drivers have attempted to contest the new regulations and the GPS in particular. Their efforts highlight a number of difficulties faced by many workers and demand a rethinking of many

traditional assumptions about labour relations. With the growth in numbers of independent contractors, perma-temps, and temporary workers concurrent with a disillusionment and decline in labour unions there is an increasingly

large sector of the workforce excluded from the benefits of unions and who find it difficult to contest unfair practices.

Before the formation of the Taxi Workers Alliance the drivers went fourteen years without a fare increase (Tywman, 2005). This can be attributed both to the poor regulation from the Pennsylvania Utility Commission and the lack of an effective union to represent the interests of the drivers (Parker, 2005). There was a “Brotherhood” of Taxi Worker’s in the city which functioned as a quasi-union for years collecting dues from the drivers but doing very little to improve wages and working conditions for the drivers (Taxi Workers Alliance, 2007a).

The group was also regarded as ineffective due to the fact that the Brotherhood was a group of drivers and owners together though the two groups often have conflicting interests (2007). Because the group was partly comprised of owners, the group exerted little pressure upon the owners and did little to prevent the owners from raising fees which the drivers must pay while neglecting to give them a fare increase. From an owners perspective, keeping fares low encourages more customers and the financial risks are passed of to the driver in the way of fees. So though not a traditional union, per se, the ‘Brotherhood’ is emblematic of a trend of disillusionment with labour unions. Decades ago, Henry

Braverman criticised unions as “weakened” and that unions had “lost the will or ambition” and had turned ever more to “bargaining over labour’s share in the product” which was “ideologically destructive” (1974: 10). Similar to the situation in Philadelphia, Biju Mathew describes the decline of the taxicab union in New York City where the union became so influenced by government and owner interests that it fought against the interests of taxicab drivers and worked to prevent any opposition from drivers (2005).

Initially, a handful of motivated and politically aware drivers came together to lobby for a fare increase. This was shortly after the Philadelphia Parking

Authority took over as regulator for the industry. Emboldened by their success when they won the fare increase they considered how to expand their group to more effectively lobby for the interests of the drivers (Taxi Workers Alliance, 2007a). Initially, they loosely worked with the Brotherhood, however, they quickly discerned the limitations of that relationship. They began a dialogue with the Taxi Workers Alliance of New York City co-founded by the charismatic Bhairavi Desai, a young activist committed to immigrant rights and the rights specifically of South Asian immigrants in New York City (Mathew, 2005). Biju Mathew, also a member of the TWA of NY wrote a book about the groups efforts entitled Taxi!: Cabs and Capitalism in New York City published in 2005.

Motivated by the strong activist ideals of the Taxi Workers Alliance the drivers in Philadelphia decided to create a chapter of the TWA in Philadelphia in order to create a collective body that would be more dedicated to fighting for the rights of drivers.

Intent on organising an alternative to the “Brotherhood” a group of drivers, with guidance from the Taxi Workers Alliance of New York City, formed a

Philadelphia chapter of the Alliance. However, they had a difficult time

convincing a diverse group of 5000 drivers to join the group. First, there were many different types of drivers – there were part-time, full-time, night drivers, day drivers, owner-operators, those who only work the train station, and so on.

While it may seem like a small distinction to those outside of the industry these different groups, historically, have had little contact with each other (Mathew,

2005). Those who own their own cab envision themselves as completely

independent, immune from the difficulties of working with owners. They begin a shift without worrying about lease fees or that the car may break down during their shift due to actions from another driver. Owners and drivers continually disagree on who should be held responsible for the upkeep and repairs of vehicles. Owner operators are generally older and have been in the industry longer and have a stronger commitment to the profession while many of the younger newer drivers are more transient and view the job as a transition to something else (Mathew, 2005). Additionally, there is a different mindset between those that work the train station and airport versus those that work the city streets. Those working the train station and airport generally spend hours waiting in queues and the work is very tedious. The fares are more consistent and predictable but the work more monotonous. Also, from the hours spent waiting in the holding lots at the airport and train station a distinct subculture emerges (Mathew, 2005).

Secondly, there were the non-professional differences as the drivers are predominantly new immigrants from at least forty different nations, different religions, and different races (Shukur, 2010 and Diulio, 2011). Biju Mathew book focuses on how this complicates organising efforts. Different ethnic groups create their own subcultures and, particularly if language is an issue, are cut off from other drivers (Mathew, 2005). Sometimes this is the subgroup separating itself from the whole and sometimes the group is excluded from the whole.

Mathew describes how upcoming actions had to be communicated to the different groups by representatives of their own ethnic group. Drivers of different ethnicities and languages sometimes further isolate themselves by

developing their own networks of owners and dispatchers who dispense calls in the native language (Mathew, 2005). Animosity amongst drivers of different ethnicities and nationalities can be deeply embedded. Many of these drivers have come to America to escape from war. However, allegiances remain when they come to the United States. Mathew describes the difficulties in getting Pakistani and Indian drivers to work with each other (2005). Cultural

stereotypes, misconceptions of African Americans, and racist attitudes further complicate the relations as the new immigrant drivers expressed distrust and scepticism of African American drivers. This was particularly the case in Philadelphia as African TWA members expressed the difficulties in convincing fellow immigrant drivers to back the TWA president who was African American (Thompson, 2008).

Third, the drivers were sceptical that the Alliance would offer anything better than the previous “Brotherhood”. Many drivers had been paying dues to the

“Brotherhood” and seen little for it. Drivers were resistant and cynical towards any new group claiming that they would work for their interests (Thompson, 2008). Some were reluctant to give support for a group that was to represent all drivers when perhaps they preferred, for any number of reasons including those mentioned above, to remain “independent”. In a climate of declining union participation there was a lack of understanding how collective bodies such as the TWA could work to improve the working conditions for drivers. While there are stereotypes and bad publicity regarding unions there is little widely available information, particularly for new immigrants, on how unions could help them.

The TWA had to work against lack of information and misinformation.

Fourth, as a group of independent contractors it was difficult to convince the drivers that there would be any personal benefits to working together with other drivers. This conception is found throughout society with a focus upon

independent individuals and a decline of citizens willing to work together.

Zygmunt Bauman describes the difficulties of convincing individuals that their personal grievances can be shared interests as a “daunting task”. (2000: 35) Bauman describes the difference between the ‘citizen’ who is “inclined to seek her or his own welfare through the well-being of the city – while the individual tends to be … wary about ‘common cause’ (2000: 35)” Though poorly paid and with many health and crime risks, drivers often justify their occupational choice by highlighting the ‘independence’ of the job (Mathew, 2005). They are on their own most of the day and choose how much interaction to have with customers and other drivers. Forming a collective body is, in some ways, counter to the whole perceived culture of taxicab drivers. There was a general lack of

motivation to improve the working conditions as cynicism is widespread and many others, even if they end up working as drivers longer than initially

planned, do not feel deeply invested in the profession. It is viewed, particularly for new immigrants, as a good entry-level job that does not require a lot of training or language skills (Diulio, 2011). Many see the job as temporary and, thus, do not see the point in becoming involved in a group. The goals of the Taxi Workers Alliance seem far off in the distance. It is difficult to motivate

individuals to commit to a long-term fight. Many involved in the Taxi Workers Alliance saw themselves as pioneers working to improve labour relations for future generations within the taxicab industry but also to improve the situation for the working class as a whole (Taxi Workers Alliance, 2007a). While these are

ambitious and admirable goals the organisers found it difficult to motivate others who were less dedicated to such ideological positions.

This lack of a sense of community and desire to work collectively to improve conditions not just individually but as a group was a problem not only for organising the drivers but also re-emerged as a difficulty when the drivers worked to get public support for their efforts. Again, residents struggled to see how the conflict between the drivers and the Philadelphia Parking Authority affected them (Thompson, 2008 and Philebrity.com, 2007). Even though the organisers understood that their conflict with the Philadelphia Parking

Authority was intrinsically related to wider issues in the city they struggled to articulate it effectively to the public. The issue is tied into the wider debates about urban renewal in the city, the growing inequality in the city, and the city’s changing labour market but all of this is a rather complex argument which is difficult to convey in a press release, placard, or petition. The Parking

Authority’s surveillance measures is a pilot program which other industries and governments are watching closely. This attitude towards increased monitoring of employees is not isolated to the taxi cab industry and will likely spread to other industries. Since the Parking Authority installed GPS in the city’s cabs, governments in New York City, Chicago, and Atlanta have begun to work on similar plans (Taxitronic, Inc., n.d.). However, the drivers continued to find it difficult to express to residents that this plan is a part of a wider programme throughout the city and that if they do not feel directly effected now they likely will in the future. Again related to Bauman’s writings on this, it is unfortunate that the drivers feel that the only way they can get support from the public is through finding a way for the public to feel that it will effect them directly. There

is little sense of communal ties where residents would support their efforts merely because they agree with their position and feel that they have been wrongly discriminated against.

It is difficult to say now how many members are involved in the Taxi Workers Alliance in Philadelphia. Through their mobilisation efforts they received support from about 1200 drivers who they considered to be members

(AllBusiness.com, 2007). However, in regards to those paying dues, the Alliance has about 100 true members (Taxi Workers Alliance, 2008). The organisers have spent countless hours talking to drivers and trying to prove their

commitment to improving the industry (Thompson, 2008). The organisers held meetings and rallies to mobilise the drivers. They became fixtures in the waiting areas at the airport and train station, available to answer questions and discuss issues. Also, as those are also the areas most frequented by inspectors,

organisers intervened and defended the drivers when inspectors became overzealous carrying out their duties (Thompson, 2008).

One factor potentially contributing to this is that the TWA struggled to receive any outside recognition particularly from labour organisations who, until very recently, excluded such non-traditional classifications of workers from access to their resources. After years of efforts, the TWA finally was able to join the AFL-CIO (the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Relations, the largest federation of unions in the United States, in 2011 (IBEW.org, 2011).

If the Alliance were affiliated with a larger labour organisation earlier in their dispute they would have benefitted from the strengthened lobbying power, public relations resources, and increased funding. Such organisations give

advice and training to groups to educate them on the complicated processes and instruct them on how best to address their problems (IBEW.org, 2011). They would help them to understand the difficult legal system which is particularly bewildering for new immigrants. Labour organisations have generations of experience in industrial action, valuable experience to share with new

organisers, resources for training, and established contacts with government officials, lawyers, and lobbyists. Without such support, governments and employers find it easy to impose strict regulations upon such groups as they have little clout to fight back. In this case, the Philadelphia Parking Authority and the government in general did not have to take the Taxi Workers Alliance seriously because they did not have much influence or clout. For years the TWA lacked the leverage that would come from affiliation with a large group of politically motivated workers who would be used to using their influence in election campaigns.

4.8 Opposition to the Parking Authority’s “Technology Enhancement