News

Harvard Medical School Cancels Student Groups’ Pro-Palestine Vigil

News

Former FTC Chair Lina Khan Urges Democrats to Rethink Federal Agency Function at IOP Forum

News

Cyanobacteria Advisory Expected To Lift Before Head of the Charles Regatta

News

After QuOffice’s Closure, Its Staff Are No Longer Confidential Resources for Students Reporting Sexual Misconduct

News

Harvard Still On Track To Reach Fossil Fuel-Neutral Status by 2026, Sustainability Report Finds

Editorials

Vote ‘Yes’ on Ballot Question 3 to Allow Rideshare Workers to Drive Change.

By Emily N. Dial
By The Crimson Editorial Board
This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

From academic workers to residential advisors to student employees, our Board is proud to support organized labor on campus. Because all workers deserve a say in the terms of their employment, we call for a “yes” vote on Ballot Question 3.

The right to unionize is all the more important to rideshare industry gig workers, because they aren’t categorized as employees in Massachusetts, denying them the protections that come with that status. As a result, Uber and Lyft drivers nationwide report low pay, insufficient healthcare coverage, and workplace stress. It’s no wonder the Massachusetts attorney general successfully sued those companies for labor law violations, winning a settlement of $175 million and improvements to working conditions.

With a union, drivers can build on these victories and influence the terms of their work. The state government should not stand in their way.

Of course, the ballot measure is far from a panacea. Forming a union and building a representative leadership structure is no easy task, especially given the transient nature of gig work. But that’s not a reason for a government prohibition — it’s a challenge organizers stand ready to face.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Have a suggestion, question, or concern for The Crimson Editorial Board? Click here.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags
Editorials