« 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 - Franklin 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: # | %

Franklin County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
24,629
15,532
2,457 42,618
Ashfield
 
789
358
69
1,216
Bernardston
 
702
623
86
1,411
Buckland
 
688
386
69
1,143
Charlemont
 
436
253
55
744
Colrain
 
573
413
64
1,050
Conway
 
781
467
62
1,310
Deerfield
 
1,783
1,334
191
3,308
Erving
 
500
432
46
978
Gill
 
560
398
58
1,016
Greenfield More »
 
5,749
3,255
574
9,578
Hawley
 
99
79
18
196
Heath
 
266
183
23
472
Leverett
 
915
311
84
1,310
Leyden
 
273
195
28
496
Monroe
 
26
35
5
66
Montague More »
 
2,853
1,715
274
4,842
New Salem
 
359
309
46
714
Northfield
 
1,056
766
132
1,954
Orange More »
 
2,068
1,662
214
3,944
Rowe
 
127
118
20
265
Shelburne
 
745
418
73
1,236
Shutesbury
 
919
290
55
1,264
Sunderland
 
1,143
674
78
1,895
Warwick
 
289
185
37
511
Wendell
 
423
148
34
605
Whately
 
507
525
62
1,094
County Totals
24,629
15,532
2,457 42,618