California regulators, still working out the details of the Clean Miles Standard, have been feeling tension between drivers and the companies. “Labour status is the elephant in the room,” said Shrayas Jatkar, a policy specialist with the state Workforce Development Board, at a recent meeting hosted by government agencies involved in writing the rule.
Despite this, Uber and Lyft have spent more than $200 million to ensure that drivers in California remain independent contractors and ultimately responsible for their own EV transition. In 2020, the companies, along with delivery companies DoorDash and Instacart, spent that much to orchestrate an aggressive ballot campaign that eventually convinced a majority of state voters to cement that employment status. In return, drivers get a minimum wage guarantee while driving to and making rides (but not while waiting for them) and a health care allowance for those who drive many hours a week. Drivers are still not eligible for traditional benefits such as full worker compensation and sick pay.
Drivers’ employment status has proven to be a barrier to electrification, said Sam Appel, California’s state manager at BlueGreen Alliance, a coalition of environmental and labor groups. “This business model creates a huge financial and operational barrier to rolling out a technology that needs to be rolled out on a large scale, with a huge investment behind it,” he says.
That’s a shame, because environmentalists say driving electric hail vehicles is a great idea — in part because, contrary to the companies’ early marketing, the business isn’t naturally good for the planet. Recent research by the Union of Concerned Scientists shows that taxi rides cause an average of 69 percent more pollution than the trips they displace, even those in private cars. The problem is that Ubers and Lyfts have to travel between fares, usually burning gas along the way. Turn those travels electric, though, and the numbers don’t look too bad. Electric rides, the same analysis found, would cut emissions by half compared to private cars.
Jeremy Michalek, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University who studies electrification policy, says he can’t think of a better industry to electrify than ride-hailing. The vehicles cover a lot of miles. Soon, many more electric models will be available in the US, especially when compared to other high-pollution vehicles such as trucks. “It really makes sense that there’s a focus on that application,” Michalek says.
In addition to their investments, Uber and Lyft say they need government help to meet their 2030 targets. “As we see some of the stick-style policies starting to take shape in California, we hope roots will follow,” said Adam Gromis, who manages Uber’s sustainability policy. The companies would like to see more government subsidies for potential buyers of low-income EVs (California already offers several), programs that get chargers in apartment buildings, and a more complete network of public stations.
Gromis cites a new London congestion tariff plan as a positive step towards electrification. There, the mayor has proposed expanding a program that charges non-electricity drivers to travel through the heart of the city. A similar plan is in the works in New York City, but is years behind schedule.
If Uber and Lyft don’t meet the goal of having all of their cars electric by the end of the decade, they could offset the remaining emissions by increasing their pooled rides (a service that was discontinued during the pandemic) or increasing the number of miles per vehicle. cut driver travels between trips, or even invest in cycling or walking infrastructure. The rule will slowly increase the companies’ emissions targets early next year. But drivers in California say they’re not sure if the company’s electric dreams will take off without renewed confidence and transparency.
More great WIRED stories
