« Go Back   « Go Back
Summary of Question 3
The proposed law would provide Transportation Network Drivers (?Drivers?) with the right to form unions (?Driver Organizations?) to collectively bargain with Transportation Network Companies (?Companies?)-which are companies that use a digital network to connect riders to drivers for pre-arranged transportation-to create negotiated recommendations concerning wages, benefits 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 Driver Organizations. The state would supervise the labor activities permitted by the proposed law and would have responsibility for approving or disapproving the negotiated recommendations. The proposed law would define certain activities by a Company or a Driver Organization to be unfair work practices. The proposed law would establish a hearing process for the state Employment Relations Board (?Board?) to follow when a Company or Driver Organization is charged with an unfair work practice. The proposed law would permit the Board to take action, including awarding compensation to adversely affected Drivers, if it found that an unfair work practice had been committed. The proposed law would provide for an appeal of a Board decision to the state Appeals Court. This proposed law also would establish a procedure for determining which Drivers are Active Drivers, meaning that they completed more than the median number of rides in the previous six months. The proposed law would establish procedures for the Board to determine that a Driver Organization has signed authorizations from at least five percent of Active Drivers, entitling the Driver Organization to a list of Active Drivers; to designate a Driver Organization as the exclusive bargaining representative for all Drivers based on signed authorizations from at least twenty-five percent of Active Drivers; to resolve disputes over exclusive bargaining status, including through elections; and to decertify a Driver Organization from exclusive bargaining status. A Driver Organization that has been designated the exclusive bargaining representative would have the exclusive right to represent the Drivers and to receive voluntary membership dues deductions. Once the Board determined that a Driver Organization was the exclusive bargaining representative for all Drivers, the Companies would be required to bargain with that Driver Organization concerning wages, benefits and terms and conditions of work. Once the Driver Organization and Companies reached agreement on wages, benefits, and the terms and conditions of work, that agreement would be voted upon by all Drivers who has completed at least 100 trips the previous quarter. If approved by a majority of votes cast, the recommendations would be submitted to the state Secretary of Labor for approval and if approved, would be effective for three years. The proposed law would establish procedures for the mediation and arbitration if the Driver Organization and Companies failed to reach agreement within a certain period of time. An arbitrator would consider factors set forth in the proposed law, including whether the wages of Drivers would be enough so that Drivers would not need to rely upon any public benefits. The proposed law also sets out procedures for the Secretary of Labor?s review and approval of recommendations negotiated by a Driver Organization and the Companies and for judicial review of the Secretary?s decision. The proposed law states that neither its provisions, an agreement nor a determination by the Secretary would be able to lessen labor standards established by other laws. If there were any conflict between the proposed law and existing Massachusetts labor relations law, the proposed law would prevail. The Board would make rules and regulations as appropriate to effectuate the proposed law. The proposed law states that, if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.

2024 - Essex County - Question 3Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 1, 2024?

View as: # | %

Essex County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
200,385
177,986
27,932 406,303
Amesbury More »
 
5,390
4,451
580
10,421
Andover More »
 
9,422
10,135
1,122
20,679
Beverly More »
 
12,287
10,407
1,214
23,908
Boxford More »
 
2,238
2,972
253
5,463
Danvers More »
 
7,316
8,318
901
16,535
Essex
 
1,113
1,178
147
2,438
Georgetown More »
 
2,344
2,989
242
5,575
Gloucester More »
 
8,909
7,688
1,301
17,898
Groveland More »
 
1,881
2,359
229
4,469
Hamilton More »
 
2,225
2,343
271
4,839
Haverhill More »
 
16,080
13,684
1,827
31,591
Ipswich More »
 
4,667
4,448
518
9,633
Lawrence More »
 
13,086
4,965
3,170
21,221
Lynn More »
 
18,438
10,476
3,133
32,047
Lynnfield More »
 
3,099
4,537
531
8,167
Manchester-by-the-Sea
 
1,693
1,752
237
3,682
Marblehead More »
 
6,316
6,659
785
13,760
Merrimac More »
 
2,072
2,032
246
4,350
Methuen More »
 
12,190
10,503
2,010
24,703
Middleton More »
 
2,233
3,270
343
5,846
Nahant
 
1,102
1,099
151
2,352
Newbury More »
 
2,173
2,443
285
4,901
Newburyport More »
 
6,286
5,509
784
12,579
N. Andover More »
 
7,779
8,379
983
17,141
Peabody More »
 
13,032
14,104
1,962
29,098
Rockport More »
 
2,702
2,166
364
5,232
Rowley
 
1,747
2,170
203
4,120
Salem More »
 
14,181
7,748
1,475
23,404
Salisbury More »
 
2,508
2,686
363
5,557
Saugus More »
 
6,781
7,130
1,263
15,174
Swampscott More »
 
4,702
4,070
493
9,265
Topsfield More »
 
1,675
2,432
221
4,328
Wenham More »
 
1,192
1,290
146
2,628
W. Newbury
 
1,526
1,594
179
3,299
County Totals
200,385
177,986
27,932 406,303