Counterpoint: Keep rideshare drivers moving in Minneapolis

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I started driving with Lyft back in 2018 as a way to support my family. Through driving, I've been able to provide a better life for my young daughter. The flexibility lets me be there when she needs me and the access to daily income means I can better handle my finances. This simply wouldn't have been possible if I had continued with a traditional 9-to-5.

But all that opportunity, and her brighter future, will be thrown into jeopardy if the Minneapolis City Council passes its proposed rideshare ordinance ("What Minneapolis leaders owe rideshare workers," Opinion Exchange, Aug. 15).

Sold as a way to improve rideshare driver pay and provide us protections, it actually looks more like an attempt to just stick it to the companies than to help drivers. It mandates an incredibly high rate for driver pay, which sounds good on paper, but would really have the opposite effect on my wallet.

Here's a simple math equation the proponents want you to ignore. If you mandate that driver pay become over double what it is now, rider prices will skyrocket. A $20 ride becomes a $40 ride. Obviously, only the most wealthy could afford that kind of increase, so the number of rides I get plummets. Even at the higher rate, I end up earning less than I do today. It's a loss for riders and a loss for drivers. This is why Gov. Tim Walz vetoed a nearly identical bill earlier this year and instead created a task force that includes drivers, the companies and even representatives from the city of Minneapolis to study the issue.

The proponents love to claim their bill is modeled after one that was passed in Washington state. But they conveniently forget to tell you that the law was the result of months of collaboration between drivers, labor unions, elected officials and the companies. It represented a compromise that benefited everybody, which is the ultimate goal of the state's task force.

This bill's process has none of that. Instead of listening to drivers, riders and companies, the authors are committed only to passing it with as little consideration as possible. Shockingly, it will have gone from introduction to a full vote in less than a month, with minimal debate and regardless of the consequences.

And the consequences are substantial. Not only would rides become a luxury, but the platforms would become less safe. It would make it very hard to deactivate bad drivers, even if they were accused of something as egregious as sexual assault. In fact, it could force the survivor of the attack to have to relive that terrible experience and testify against the driver, otherwise the platform could be forced to allow the driver back on the platform to continue driving and potentially strike again. As a father to a daughter, this simply cannot stand.

This isn't to say drivers don't deserve fair pay and better protections. I want that, and I know many other drivers that want that, too. But this industry is complex, and our livelihoods are on the line. And it's why a growing number of drivers are against this bill.

Rather than jam through unproven and potentially devastating legislation, we should take our time to study the right way to improve the driving experience. That is ultimately how you best help drivers, and it's why I urge the City Council to vote no on this bill.

Paris Richardson, of St. Paul, is an independent driver.