The Trial of the Driverless Car

that championed great cinema.

“From iconic directors to emerging authors, there's always something new to discover.”

If you're looking for something really special, check out Father Mother Sister Brother. The eagerly awaited new film from Jim Jarmish, now streaming on Mubi in the U.S. It follows adult children navigating their relationships with somewhat distant parents and each other. It starts Tom Wades, Adam Driver, Miami BLic, Charlotte Rampling, Kate Blanchett, Vicky Crips, India

and Lucas Abbot. Mubi is a curated streaming service dedicated to elevating great cinema from around the globe. Perfect for lovers of great cinema, and for anyone who hasn't discovered how much they love it yet. To stream the best of cinema, you can try Mubi free for 30 days at Mubi.com/surch engine.

That's mubi.com/surch engine for a whole month of great cinema for free. [Music]

“Our first story was about a driver, a robot driver, who evolved over many years at the”

nudging and training and machinations of a team of tech people in California.

The second story I want to tell you also starts with the driver.

A driver who is also going to evolve and change due to the machinations of some different west coast tech companies, the difference is that this driver is a human being. Chapter 1, Abdiazis. I met Abdiazis in Boston, where he's been a driver for many decades. He's doing it all the way back in the '90s.

Back then, he considered taxi driver to be at these in job. A career. Our first time I've been driving for 30 years now, 30 years. Yes. I had a limo service for 10 years, and then I was doing a 5 years follow-up cab, a taxi.

And then, one day in 2011, Abdiazis was hanging out at the airport with the other drivers, when he's a man from the future showed up with a plan to change his life.

“When Uber came, I remember by 2011 they came to the airport.”

We were in the waiting area, at the moment we have a designated parking lot where we wait the fairs, so they come there and they say, hey, you know, we are introducing you an a company that will do the same as a taxi, but it's an app. We want you guys to join with us, and you know, you can have your own car. We will give you a phone with the app, and we can sign you up, and you can make money.

What did you think? At the time, I say, it is good, but you didn't come here to help us. You come here to kill this business. Okay? You knew.

I knew. Abdiazis had not been important yesterday.

Here's what he understood immediately.

The taxi business he operated in, up until now, had worked as a kind of monopoly. In Boston, like many American cities, you legally were not allowed to drive a cab without a taxi license, a medallion, new medallions were almost never issued. So assuming you could afford to buy or rent a medallion, the city itself would make your job stable by protecting you from competition.

But Uber was about to kill that system. Uber drivers just drove without medallions. The company argued that since they were picking up passengers via this newfangled phone app, they didn't need them. Abdiazis knew that this was going to kill the industry, at least as it currently existed.

Taxi driver would still be a job, but medallion owning taxi driver would not be a wave was coming. He knew what he had to do, and so he told his fellow taxi drivers his strategy for dealing with Uber, the company that had come to kill their industry. I told them, "Listen, I'm going to join them."

As I see where they're going, I read a lot of articles about them, they start from San Francisco, they want to Chicago, I say, they are expanding. So we can't stop this peak, we cannot stop Uber. So Abdiazis found himself working for Uber. He says someone at the company handed him his new marching orders.

We can give you a laptop, we can give you 200 phones each week, so we want you to give these phones to the drivers that you hire, but we want you to set it up, they need to bring

everyone that you signed, you give it a phone, you activate the phone, they go to go. So they were giving you 200 iPhones a week to give out, to give out, yeah, to the drivers. So it's crazy, it's like they're coming to kill your business.

“Exactly, I knew, I knew, I knew, I knew, that's why I said, if you cannot beat them”

join them, so I'm going to join them. Abdiazis, a man who could glimpse the future clearly enough to adapt to it, he'd work

recruiting for Uber for a while, then he'd be one of the first 100 Uber drivers in Boston,

signed up for Uber Black, the premium service, got himself a very expensive heart. At first, it was an even better job than the one they destroyed, Uber in those early days, was pretty generous. But after a few years, Abdiazis says that started to change. In 2022, Uber began rolling out a big change to its platform, instead of taking a set

percentage of each fare, Uber started using an algorithm, to offer drivers variable rates, based on what its system thought each driver would accept for a given ride. The drivers believed that Uber, once it's up showing them its take, raised that take by a lot. Uber, who we contacted for the story, maintains that their take rate is still

"around 20%, and that what's gone up actually are government taxes and fees.

“But Abdiazis does not believe them, and most drivers I've talked to share his view.”

Abdiazis's perspective is that once Uber and Lyft had leverage, they started using it against the drivers. The market was wide open, new drivers signed up every day. If you didn't like it, you could leave. To obvious ease and his fellow drivers, this all felt like a bait and switch.

They could quit, but many of them had car loans. What they actually wanted was for the companies to raise their pay, closer to what it had been before. They wanted better pay, they wanted some other concessions. Some of the drivers started thinking about whether there might be some way to exercise

power over the apps. They started talking about a union. So Abdiazis found himself, once again, a recruiter for a disruptive new organization. So when we started, we were like 400 drivers, and we joined the union. You were early, you were early at Uber, you were early at the union.

Exactly. Exactly. Because I've been in the industry for quite a while, you know, 30 years. I know what is going on, you know, it is, it is my profession, you know. So, and the union, they, you know, say, okay, call all the drivers, let us unite, and then

we're going to go to the state. It feels a little bit like when Uber was having you, some people have, and then the union having you, some people, does it feel similar, like going around, like explaining something to people, telling them what the benefits are. Absolutely, exactly.

Because you see a lot of drivers, they don't know nothing about union. Things were really promising. They got a big ballad initiative in front of Massachusetts voters that gave them the right to even try the unionized, they were collecting signatures. But then, during this still fledgling moment in their union drive, a different tech company

appeared on the horizon.

“Do you remember the first time you heard about Wayemow?”

The Wayemow, the first time I heard was, back in 2022, I heard in a San Francisco that they

are doing testing. What did you think? I say, okay, I mean, I'm not against technology, you know, I welcome in a technology same as Uber, when they come to business. But I knew where they were heading to.

He'll see when Uber came, their aim was to kill taxi business. Now Wayemow is to kill the drivers. How you understand a story, what you feel as you hear it, it's so much about where the teller chooses to start it. The dry-realist car in the story I'd heard had begun as a contest among academics, who

were not primarily driven by profit. Some of them had genuinely wanted to solve the problem of car accidents, others thought that making a robot drive across a desert, which is a very cool puzzle to put their minds to. Those experiments had been sharpened into a technological product, inside the cushy bubble

of an enormously wealthy tech company.

Who now had sent mapping cars to obdisees a city, the first step to deployment there.

When Uber had come to town, obdisees had thought, if he can't beat him, join him. Now Wayemow is here, and he saw no way to join them. So he had to find a way to beat them. Fortunately for obdisees, he's in Boston. CHAPTER 2, union town Boston City Councilors began meeting last summer to discuss preemptively

The verse meeting took place in July, inside Boston City Hall, a room resplendent in many

huts of municipal brown, the state agenda for the hearing, DACA 1141, sounded neutral to the point of boring. Order for a hearing to evaluate autonomous vehicle operations in the city of Boston. The goals for today's hearing is to gather information, hear from stakeholders, and better understand the regulatory landscape. We must explore this very dry description.

“What was it actually going to happen would be significantly more raucous?”

These hearings started out with the flavor and intensity of a political rally. We wanted to find a way to stop these cars, and this would be the room where they laid out the case as to why. It'd be the beginning of the fight. Some version of this fight has been happening with increasing frequency in American cities,

not all cities, blue cities. There's this pattern actually observed by reporter Timothy Bealey, which is that cities in red and purple states like Austin and Phoenix mostly welcome Wayemow, whereas places like DC and New York fight it. In cities that fight Wayemow, the conversation is less about safety, and much more about

weather, robo taxis will take away jobs. My hope was if I paid attention to Boston. Maybe what was beginning here as just a fight would evolve. Into politicians starting to think through some kind of compromise. I think these kinds of compromises, finding solutions for workers who AI could displace.

They are probably one of the most important challenges for our politicians today.

And so Boston, for me, was a test case. Are we capable? Where are our politics ready? So here's how things began. Bostonians were here today to talk about something contentious, jobs, but they started

with the one thing everybody could probably agree on. Boston's streets, the battleground here, were barely fit for human driving, let alone Wayemow. Boston is one of the oldest major cities in the country with narrow, one-way street Sally's in the lack of a traditional grid system.

It's really, really difficult to drive. You will get the map. It looks like a child's drawing, you know? We also have issues with double-pac cars, ride shares, delivery vehicles. After lambasting Boston streets a while longer, the people here get to the issue that

will actually dominate these hearings. Jobs, in particular union jobs. We need to address potential layoffs for our union drivers with the introduction of self-driving cars.

“I think it's important that, you know, we listen when we hear teamsters in the Carmen Union,”

S-E-I-U, and countless residents who fail lying sighted by this. The app drivers union. I believe it's easy as union. We're the stars of the hearing today. I'm a pro member of AVU, app drivers union, and I'm here to ask you to protect a local

jobs. Ride shared drivers, just want the right to unionize and to fight for better wages and conditions. Robot cars threaten all of this progress. I'll do the easy job too, and a later hearing.

I understand if it's a business, if it's capitalism, but not in my city, at the expense of our jobs. Thank you. The app drivers were not officially a union yet, technically they were still in the process of forming, but the threat from Waymo seems so dire that this larger coalition

had been created that included a bunch of historic unions.

“It was called labor united against Waymo.”

Every driver's union in Boston, uniting to try to kill Waymo here. At the tip of the spear, the teamsters. Nationally, teamsers are the largest union of drivers in America, 1.4 million members, Boston is one of their biggest strongholds. This is the union that started out as workers driving teams of horses, but evolved to represent

workers who drive cars and trucks, and these say it represents lots and lots of blue collar union jobs. Boston is a union town. Everybody said this to me, over and over. In the same quick matter of fact, way that people where I'm from say New York's expensive.

The way you toss off a truth, so obvious it's barely worth repeating, but what you have

to repeat, all the time, because it informs everything always.

The teamsters and the politicians just kept repeating it, Boston is a union town. Boston is a union town, and you hear it's eaty perfectly where we are. Our city, we're proud of our workers, we're proud of Boston is a union town. We're not any of those other cities, so. Yeah, we're a union city here in the city of Boston.

We want to protect. And watching the hearings, I could see you part of what was so beautiful about Boston being a union town. As driver after driver testified about their jobs, there's just nothing moving to me anyway. So watching people talk about the dignity and importance of human work.

A few days ago, while on my route I spotted a man collapsed on the ground, he was unconscious and unresponsive, and it became clear that he had overdosed. I stayed with him flagged on a homeowner of who called 911.

quickly, he may have died. To me, a person, to way move an obstacle to avoid. You had union members who drove UPS tracks, ambulances, and while these teamsers were not immediately under threat from way-most Robotaxi service, they knew that driverless technology was not going to stop there.

We see the writing on the wall. We know that driverless car and truck companies are salivating at the idea that they could eliminate teamster jobs. Nationally, the teamsters actually sat out the last presidential race. But in Boston, the teamsters are still welded to the Democrats, and the Democrats are welded

to them. One to go, I was knocking doors with drivers across the city to get them the right to organize. You guys just were able to unionize, and this would just be a huge blow to you all. As the city counselors began to ask union leaders questions, you got the sense that counselors already knew some of these answers.

That maybe they were asking more just to get the answers on the public record. And I'm just curious, can you talk to us a little bit about the number of conversations

“that you've had with WAMO, how many times did you meet with them?”

This is City Counselor Julia Mejia asking one of the teamsters leaders how many times did WAMO reach out to you before they sent mapping cars to Boston? Thank you for the question, Councilor Mejia, it rhymes with hero. Zero. Zero.

This is why I asked the question, because oftentimes things are being done to us without us, right? And so. Chapter 3. Councilor Mejia, the counselor had arrived and our late to the hearing.

The former MTV reporter, she's no disability hyper, but in the median municipal politician, standing out in the beige sea of the city council room. She'd come to listen to the heroes, the drivers, but more than that, she'd come to make a meal out of the people she saw as the villains. Waymo's executives.

If we're competing with machines, it will ultimately have an impact on our drivers.

“At this point, given this sense, the scale of our fleet compared to Uber and Lyves, I can't”

speak to what the, the, the, the, the decrease in their revenue has been, I don't know those numbers. I can tell you that. The person on the receiving end of these questions is map Lalsh. Waymo's regional head of state and local public policy.

Lalsh looks the part of the tech exact, a spiffy suit, a swoopy cloth of silver hair. For most of their conversation, they're talking past each other, because map Lalsh wants to discuss safety and counselor Mejia wants to discuss drivers' jobs. What we are doing is creating an opportunity for people to choose to not support humans and the workforce.

That is the choice that we're giving people. I would disagree. Counselor, I would say the choice we're giving people is they can make a decision if they want to be in a safer vehicle that they feel safer and that meets. And so what we say in that are Uber and Lyves drivers and our app drivers are not safe.

I am not making comments specifically about the safety of Uber and Lyft.

But I can say as that over after 71 million miles of fully autonomous operations on U.S.

roads, we know that we are five times less in injury causing crashes than human drivers. I am not suggesting that Uber and Lyft drivers are dangerous. I am suggesting that human drivers compared to the waymo driver are involved and far more is that a driver, waymo is the robot. So let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let's,

let's be really clear about what it is. It's an apparatus. We refer, when we say, "Waymo driver," I know the chair brought us up earlier, we, that is the what we call the waymo. That is what we call the technology.

And I understand it has sensitivities in the waymo. Let me trigger it. Understood. Okay. And we'll have to make sure that we, we're, we're not driving, that's not happening.

So right now, in supermarkets, they do diesel.

“So Boston is, if like, a little character, you know, I think that it could have been, you”

know, CEOs versus bees, Boston would just be like, "We're on the bee side." You know, like, we're gonna go hard for honey, you know, like, we're crazy like that. I got to talk to Councillor Mehea, the politician who had been so offended by waymo's use of the D word. We met in person in our office in Dorchester.

The counselor was giving me and producer Emily Maltaire, a quick lesson on Boston, this foreign country where I'd happily landed. We are just not the type of city that just goes along to get along with certain things that we feel, especially like Boston is a union town, we're hardcore, we don't, we're adverse to outsiders, it's a city, but it's like a little old town, you know, it's like

very towny here. Well, this gets to what I want to ask you about, which is waymo.

Like when do you recall the first time waymo, even as a concept, showed up on your radar?

Yeah, right before the hearing. Like, I didn't know, like, first of all, I'm not one of those people, I don't pay attention

with education issues, pot holes, like murder, you know, like real life issues, that impact

“the quality of life of my constituents, and so it wasn't until recently when there was”

some rumblings of waymo wanting to set up shop here in Boston that I hadn't learned that they were in other cities, I was like, damn, they're people who like this, like, I got in a waymo car, like all excited about them, like, wow, people like this, so I was searching about because you're curious. And then the algorithm starts being like, just videos of like, happy people in driverless

car. I'm like, oh, wow, like, who are these people really excited, getting driven around by a robot or just not even a robot, there's some of these only have a little head, they're just like, yeah, that's even creepier. So that was like, ew, yeah, no.

I've talked to a few people who feel this way when they see videos of waymo's.

Part of this is a quirk of design. There are other models of driverless cars that were fully designed to be driverless, like Amazon zooks. Those cars don't have a steering wheel, but waymo retrofits pre-existing Jaguar SUVs. And so when you get in one, they're still a steering wheel.

As a passenger, you watch it turn itself as if guided by an invisible pair of hands. Seeing that wheel turn, some people feel wonder, like they're seeing the work of a very impressive engineer, others feel outraged, like they're watching the space where a human used to be, should still be. That's Julia's perspective.

When Julia was five, she and her mom moved to Boston from the Dominican Republic. Her mother was undocumented for most of her childhood, she cleaned offices for a living. Julia talks better mom a lot. How from her mom, she inherited an understanding of remission to protect working people's jobs.

I used to work at McDonald's. I used to clean offices with my mom. I did all of that. Those were low entry jobs that I could get.

“And I saw that with the self-checkout in the supermarket, right?”

Those jobs were occupied oftentimes by people who were retired, or high school students, or young people with disabilities, right? And now those jobs are being replaced by a self-checkout. And there's a sense of, for me, it's a moral issue too, right, that should be at the center of the AI conversation is that morally, while it's exciting, and we could do all of this, and we could save lots of money, but what is the unintended consequence of that,

right? You get it now, like, do you get people to get out of the line? What you're doing there? You know, that's somebody's job that you just took, they're like, "Lady, get out my face." I'm like, "Yes!" But nah, man, it's, you know, I'm at the moral police, but I just feel like we are not

thinking about other people, we're often just thinking about ourselves, and what is the quickest way to get out? To counter me here, the headline of the day really the only story was low wage workers. In the hearing, she asked the way Moex Executive about the precedent that was worrying her.

Those self-checkout machines. So right now, in supermarkets, they do these self-checkouts, right, and those are taking jobs from people, and it seems like there is a trend here, and my biggest concern as someone who had to have two to three jobs growing up just to make ends meet is that what we are doing is creating financial hardships for people who are already struggling.

And so I'm just curious, how are you reconciling with that impact that you're making on already low wage workers? I, as I said earlier to the other council's question, we are committed to increasing work force developments, and job opportunities with the industry. Not.

“But for the drivers, how are you increasing work force development opportunities for the drivers?”

Not for people who develop apps, not for people who have plans or phones, for people who are drivers, like tell me about what that looks like. We do not have workforce efforts that are specifically aimed at any part of the population. We have, we are creating jobs for individuals that want to work in the autonomous vehicle industry.

If drivers that are working work for the industry, how you understand the story, in part has to do with who you hear it from. For months, I'd been listening to the engineers who first dreamed up these drivers cars. From their perspective, they'd only ever really had one question. Could they build a car that drove itself more safely than humans could?

Waymo believed the answer is now yes, but Boston had a different question.

What about jobs? I did speak to Waymo's northeast policy manager Anthony Perez, who said he didn't want to be disingenuous. He expected over time there would be what he called transition for app drivers. But that it wasn't a one to one displacement.

He said Waymo would also create jobs, cleaning the cars, maintaining the sensors, repairing

The estimate he pointed me to said every five row of taxis might create one job, but he was

“also careful to say that it was just very hard to predict the future.”

Different cities would be different. He wasn't trying to be evasive, he explained he was trying to be honest about real uncertainty. But in the hearing that day, as Councillor Mejia pressed Waymo's Matt Walsh to describe exactly what jobs his company could provide, the existing Uber and lift drivers. Matt Walsh came up short.

If drivers that currently work for Uber or lift should decide that they want to work in the autonomous vehicle industry, there will be opportunities for them to do so. And what would their jobs title be? I'm not going to sit here and sort to speculate what the job opportunities are.

So let's just come to terms with the fact that we are creating a hostile environment

for our hardworking people who are no longer going to have work. I appreciate the question. I forget the guy's name, but he just felt a little bit arrogant.

“And I felt like, you know, even after everybody spoke, there should have been a little”

bit more humility and humanity in his understanding of why people were so adverse to the idea of losing their jobs like he could have won me over a little bit if he gave me a little bit more heart and he didn't. You really think he could have won you over? No.

I'm just joking. No. Nobody could win me over. Part of the issue, Matt Walsh was an outsider, worse an outsider from a tech company worth $126 billion dollars.

A logic of Boston politics said that nobody in this room had to listen to him. He was here in his role as a well-compensated pinata. I understood that. At the same time, if Wema was right, if its driver was 80% safer than a human one, that meant there would be preventable car accidents in Boston in the years to come.

Extents caused by human drivers making human mistakes. We lose our tempers. We check our phones. We think about other things while driving. We don't mean to, but we do.

And sometimes that means we heard other people. The people we heard would not be voting in the Democratic primary a week after this hearing, but I thought they deserved to have more of a place in the conversation than they'd had so far. Emily Maltaire, my colleague who'd been observing the interview in Councillor Mahi's

office, at one point she chimed it. I feel like for me in learning about this technology, I was very skeptical about the safety of it, and I mean, I've known people who have died in car crashes. I know someone who died in the backseat of an Uber. I don't think it was the Uber driver's fault, but I feel like, as I learned more about

the technology, I did take seriously the idea that there could be something safer about Wema technology. Is that something that you're curious about?

“I'm not curious about that in any kind of way because when I think about safety, unless”

just give you the example of the car accident, I don't see someone instinctually coming out of the car to get someone out, like if it was a Wema robot or not, it's not even a robot, it's just a wheel, who would be there to help support the consumer, who, what, how. So I don't, I don't think the safety concern is a good compelling argument for me. For you, it's like, I don't think there's anything they would show you where you would think.

You just trust humans more. I would hope the world would trust humans more.

When she left that first hearing, she was pretty sure her sighted one.

The unions, the app drivers, had made their case against the robots. The Wema executives had clearly been outmatched. The thing was, though, counselor may hear at missed something. There had been one person who's testimony, she just hadn't heard. Someone who'd speak for two brief minutes and who'd begin to change the entire conversation

in Boston. After short break, Carl. As you can see, we've got a very long way to go. We've got a lot to tell you. Stop.

We've got a lot to tell you.

In a package to a fixed price.

“So we've got about 75% cost and we've got a lot of flexible time.”

Now let's start with Stepstown.de/All Jobs. We've got a lot to tell you. Let's start with Stepstown. Let's start with Stepstown. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a lot to tell you.

We've got a lot to tell you. We've got a luxury or weakness. It was, in fact, important research. That's what the story was about. It was a joke, but it wasn't.

I did want to talk to as many drivers as I could while I was in Boston. I'd end up interviewing eight for the Union's office and a random sample of four out in the world. Nearly all the drivers described the job as having recently gotten a harder, just like Obdi Aziz had. They were working more hours for less money.

“But the Union and non-union workers differed in some important ways.”

The non-union drivers didn't really have way more on their radar. And they were only to think of driving as a long-term career. This matches the data we have. A 2018 study found that the average Uber driver drives for three months. It's a lot of people's first job in our country.

A ladder to their next one. So the union drivers were pretty unusual. Just by dentro the fact that they made a career out of this. Those were the things I learned in the cabs I could persuade Emily to take. And in the studies, I read about those cabs.

This Tuesday, however, we were walking. The Boston win playfully tearing the skin from my bones. Our mission that morning was to meet a man named Carl Richardson, for an interview that was thankfully indoors. He met us in the lobby.

We'd never met in person before, but everything I saw him.

Carl has significant hearing loss. He wears two hearing aids. He's almost completely blind. He has a yellow Labrador with him at all times. That's his guide dog, Dayton. Carl had shown up in these hearings as a private citizen.

To argue in favor of autonomous vehicles. Like Councillor Julie Mejia, he'd been outraged by what he encountered. But for entirely different reasons. Capture three. The right to autonomy.

Carl told me the story of the day as he'd experienced it. First of all, when I walked a cloth to the hall plaza, you can hear protest and melds. Union protest and melds.

“You drive with the cars and yell, do you hear the air shower?”

Do you hear the air shower? Do you hear the air shower? Do you hear the air shower? Do you hear the air shower? Do you hear the air shower? Do you hear the air shower? Then I walked in and I got there about an hour early on purpose.

I had my intern with me. She said I was number three on my left. So I was hoping to go early.

“We got there. I think they were probably,”

let's see, the food of restaurant union with there. The app drivers union with there, the FTIU union with there. The teamster union with there. Remember the ambulance driver union being there. So the disability community was far outnumbered.

And they were allowed to even tell you that a handful of disabled people left. They were so discouraged. Based on what they were hearing, they didn't even want to testify. Why? What do they find specifically discouraging? I think that they felt like the delivery company

had already made up their mind. And I think they heard anger in the room. So some of the people didn't stay. I felt outnumbered. But I still felt like I had an important door to tell. Carl, in the room that day, kept waiting to speak.

He had expected that because of his early sign-up, he'd be one of the first speakers.

Instead, he waited nearly the entire four hours. For some reason, they'd slotted him almost at the very end. Carl Richardson, you have two minutes. Nice to see you. Yeah, hi, my name is Carl Richardson. I am the manager to take out the ADA coordinator

and I'll throw an advisory board member for May. You see Carl, he's wearing a light blue button up in a tie. We've heard a lot about the impact on the union and the drivers and the workforce. Let's talk about the community. I think it would impact in favor of not only people with physical disabilities like myself,

but people with mental health. And by the time I testified, I threw out my written prepared remarks. And I just went back. We keep talking about employment. I want to have that discussion.

Do you know how many jobs I've turned down because I can't get there or how many... If you spend time talking to Carl, you learn a lot about unemployment and the disability community. It's high.

Their unemployment rate is twice as high as the rest of the workforce. One contributing factor to that number that a lot of people don't think about is just transportation. You can't do a job if you can't reliably get to it. Are you going to Uber drive a tram to do an amazing job?

But not always. At least once a week, I get denied access to Uber and Lyft

because they refused to take me because I have a service dog. And then I and my civil rights. I often get denied access to because they won't go beyond the city limit because they're worried about maximizing their revenue and the ability to pick up a return fair.

“My life is not limited to the city limit.”

And the other thing would do it would increase. There's actually been pretty well documented issues with discrimination by Uber drivers against disabled people. There's an active DOJ lawsuit about it right now. Wheelchair users whose rides are canceled because we take extra time to help them load in.

Blind people whose rides are canceled once the drivers see a service dog. A spokesperson in Uber said they have a zero tolerance policy for confirmed service denials and that Uber fundamentally disagrees with the DOJ's allegations. In the meantime, Carl says he spends a lot of time trying to strategize ways to stop Uber drivers from passing him by.

Carl was born with a genetic condition called usher syndrome type two. It meant he was destined to lose his vision and hearing, but gradually and as an adult. It's a difficult diagnosis in part because psychologically it requires you to accept so much. To accept loss knowing that moral loss is just a head that whatever you get used to, you'll need to get used to more.

There's a time in Carl's adult life, for instance, when you had a driver's license. So, I drove. I had 2020 vision up until I was about 30. Which is one of the reasons why autonomous vehicles are a big deal to me because I want that feeling that I used to have when I drove. I've feed them and then abandon some mobility. I know what I've lost.

You know, so, and I want that back. So, people, but it's not that people deal with it differently.

Yeah, and I have a sister who doesn't have that. She never took up driving because she knew.

She was going to have to give that up someday. I just need him when I have a heartbroken. I, such good. I'm going to drive. I'm going to work in film and television. I'm going to do everything I can. What type of car did you drive?

Well, whatever I had in total, I drove what 10, 12 years.

“I think I've totaled five cars because I remember. I was slowly going blind, but I was in denial.”

So, I'm lucky to be alive and fit in here with you today. It was hard to like go of driving. Yeah, but what finally happened is I stepped behind the wheel of a car one day. It's getting ready to go to work. Am I actually said to myself, am I going to get to work alive today?

So I called out thick and I never drove again.

It's a hard thing to give up. Yeah, and I want it back. And I never thought I'd get it back. But I now believe someday within my lifetime. We might have to convince the politicians you don't need to have eye sight

To be able to have the ability to drive an autonomous vehicle, but I think we can do it. Because it isn't just about blind people. Everybody has the money that they have to take away their drive and phone.

“Everybody has the father where they say, "Dad, I don't know if you should drive anymore."”

Everybody have the teenager who's texting on their phone. They were not even beginning to think about the possibilities of what autonomous vehicles could do. The other reason I don't want to ban autonomous vehicles in the city of Boston is because I think eventually it'll lead to personal ownership. And is that what you really want?

Or are you bet? I'm not kidding when I say I have a statement that's not why I put aside a few hundred bucks a month just for the ability for me to buy an autonomous vehicle someday. And if they ban autonomous vehicles, then they're going to ban me from the right to drive on all of them, go to school, go to medical appointment, go to the beach

on Sunday, go visit my mom on the nurse and home, whatever. We'll see a flexibility that everybody else has. Harrow wanted me to know that even though Waymo had become the subject of this fight, he did not care if Waymo specifically came to Boston. Any autonomous car company would do.

He just wanted to be able to hail a taxi that couldn't pass him by.

“And he wanted one day to own a car again.”

In the hearing near the end of his a lot of time, he told a story about something that had happened to him recently and emergency when he needed a ride. Imagine at your blind and your mother called you at seven o'clock on the Sunday night and said, I just heard from the sheriff department, I'm going to get arrested and let that come up with the money right away.

She got a call, she believed it. I'm the primary caregiver and my family. I had to figure out a way to get out there. And I got denied three times in the row while I was trying to get out to my mother. Public transportation was not true because it was laid on the Sunday night. All I wanted the ability was to be able to go home to my mom and say,

you're okay and I love you. And that would be the positive impact of autonomous vehicles. So, yeah, definitely think about the human component and the people component, but think about it for the whole community at large. Not just the union. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Carla.

“How do you think the politicians in the room saw you?”

Well, I don't think they were there to hear my speech. The only one that was there to hear was the chair of their hearing. So, I'm here alone now. So, I think it's time to adjourn the hearing. All the other city counselors had left before Carl's testimony.

Many of them had announced in the hearing that they had to go attend a different team source event, a strike by the sanitation workers, Boston's a union town. One, one, four, one is adjourned. At that hearing, I didn't feel like the disability voice,

or perspective would hurt. And it was then that I decided I was going to go back

and bring even more people which me to the second hearing.

The second hearing. In July, two city counselors had unveiled a fairly bold anti-way more ordinance. The ordinance to create that any driverless car in Boston had to have a human driver in the driver seat at all times.

And called for a feasibility study of the tech, which would include organized labor, but not the disability community. If passed, functionally, this would be a ban. The plan was to vote on the ordinance after the second hearing, which would take place in October.

The driverless car in Boston was on trial. For the record, my name is Gabrielle Cledis. I'm at the district one city counselor on the chair of the Boston City Council Committee on government operations today is October 28th, 2020.

Chapter four, a good fight.

The second hearing would go differently.

It would go differently from the beginning. One reason was because of its referee, presiding counselor Gabriella Cledis Apada, who started by trying to establish some ground rules. There will be no demonstration of approval or disapproval or signs.

So thank you so much for your understanding. We appreciate you again. Thank you so much for being here. The union went first. A string of testimonies from all sorts of drivers. Many familiar faces from the previous hearing.

And of course, counselor Julia Mejia was here. Dressed today in a John T. Black barray in Black classes.

that here we are in the day and age trying to defend

“ourselves from robots taking over our jobs.”

Right? And right here, this is the first line of defense because firstly come for the poor jobs.

First of all, I'm always ready for a good fight.

So I walked in ready. I'm like, this is one two punch. I'm going to take them all out this time. You know, they're handling the most trial. The classroom here in Spanish says they start by attacking the poorest. But from there, they keep picking us off.

The city of Boston is not going to let anyone take away the income of its people. The chair of the piano made it very clear. We're going to listen to everybody. We're going to take it in the order of testimony. Everybody's going to get three minutes.

They're going to be no output. They controlled it here. It's not better to test the money in contributions. And we're going to transition because we do have a long list to public testimony. So thank you.

Thank you so much. After the union it's spoken, everyone else who put their names on the list. Not their chance to talk. So in closing, if you do do a study, look at not only how would negatively impact people.

“But look how would it would positively impact people?”

Because to me, autonomous vehicles, it's not a dystopian future.

It's the second side of this toy.

It's the legitimate side of this toy. And I felt like I wasn't going to be along. They had a lot of people with disabilities in the room. Wants me that day. There must be more accessible, affordable and reliable transfers.

Carl had done his version of what the unions had done so well in the first round. He summons his own coalition. Hello. My name is Steam and you're ready for that. These were people from best buddies and organization for people with intellectual disabilities.

They were citizens from Boston's blind community. As a legally blind guy, dog user in Boston, I have fewer transportation options than I did 10 years ago. I came from New Hampshire and while I used to call transportation, Desert where I only had to rely on my family to help me get back and forth to be able to. I felt the room had a almost what I would call a tightness shift.

Autonomous vehicles have the potential to give me and other people with disabilities to increase independence, mobility, and flexibility. Well, I think we can go. Where did right, can't go? There would be even a mother against drunk driving who broke from one of the panels, right?

Autonomous vehicles represent another important tool in the effort to eliminate impaired drive-in. Were you welcome, Waymo? I mean, what are you going to say to a mother? You don't have a right to want autonomous vehicles for some doubt? Mad values are a partnership.

What were you just like feeling watching them talk?

So, to be honest with you, at first, I didn't know what I was walking into.

To be honest, I thought I was going to get more of the last go-round. But the second hearing, they were more strategic. And when I started hearing from some of the disability community members, I also felt like some of it was very scripted. And I haven't worked in this space, understand how you set up all of your advocates to all be on the same message.

So, I felt like they all sang the same thing. I've seen this action. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to first start off by thanking the public testimony.

“I think to my colleagues earlier, point is so important.”

So, Councillor Mejia, who says what she thinks, told the room that what she thought she just seen was a show, a show put on by Waymo. And I think that the people who are not the people that were trying to serve or the people that were trying to protect. So, I just want to name that that was very poor taste. And my personal humble opinion, while I think it's important for us to get that on the record.

I think what it did is provide. I think the word she's in that hearing is that you said you felt like it was in poor taste. I really did say poor taste. My God, everybody needs therapy after they get done with my hearing's Lord have mercy. So, yeah, I do believe that they are utilizing the disability community to their advantage.

And you don't do that to people. This is wrong. Period. I don't know what I asked this question. It's like slightly delicate, but also I don't want to get through it.

I don't, I'm not worried about it. Like Waymo is not an accessibility company. Like it's not as if they're inventing autonomous vehicles for accessibility reasons. They want to reach a large market. Like accessibility is part of it.

It's also the fact of the accessibility issue and the fact of disabled people as allies for them is communities like do you sure? But though it's AARP when they push certain things, right?

And yes, it's convenient that the two things align together.

And I hear you. And maybe that's the little selfish for Waymo. But I'm going into this. No one want to get an M2. I know that Waymo is a line in them.

I'm not going to say you. Because I'm not. If you listen to me talk, you can't take advantage of me unless they want to be. Right? So I know what I'm getting them to when I put them on behalf of autonomous vehicles.

I don't care if they make a profit. If it means my mobility, my freedom and my independent. Okay? This Waymo reaching out to the blind community. Yes.

Are they perhaps given donations to the American Council for the blind? Yes. But the individual time ain't going to die. The money going to non-profit.

Right? We're going to die. So. Did that answer your question? Yeah, and I don't.

It's like I personally. I feel like it's just, it's a question. I feel like I'm being used. If that's what you're getting now.

They never said how to testify.

They never want to help me what they say. They just said, "Please testify." On behalf of autonomous vehicles. That's all. That's it.

Nobody held my hand. Nobody gave me coaching. And I, to my knowledge. The handful of people that I recruited that testified. None of them got coaching either.

So that's Carl's position. Councillor Mejia though. And the room that day was very fired up. Very focused on the target of her eyeer. So I just want to name that that was very poor taste.

To utilize folks who are already vulnerable to fight on behalf those who have so much more than any of us here. She directed some very strong words at the man sitting across from her.

The man in a suit with gray hair.

Wamo. And I'll start with the CEO maybe. How can we utilize Wamo instead of replacing our app drivers to improve the quality of experiences for those folks who have complained?

“I think utilizing Wamo and an autonomous vehicle opens the door for elimination of practices,”

illegal practices, discrimination. No, that's not the question. The question is, right? Because you talk about your technology and your ability. Councillor Mejia pressed.

She wanted him to answer how could Wamo create new technology that would improve life for blind people without using driverless cars? That's the question. That I'm not that technology advanced to. But you're the CEO of a technology company.

No, I'm not. I'm the president of the Carol Center for the Blind. What was it going to say, Gary? That I am in. It's Greg.

Greg. Oh my God. So somebody gave me the wrong piece of it because they got you as the CEO of Wamo and the Greg. Like my team better get it together. Okay.

So let's go back. Let me just stay with you real quick, right?

“I think there is a way guy who had a lot of suit.”

I just made all types of assumptions. Oh my God. So he was going on and on about his stuff. And I think I even think I even said his name wrong. I don't know who he was.

And I felt like, you know, when you have egg in your face. Like, I had to pick up my face and put it back on. Because I was like, I'm bad at seeing. Because you were giving him a hard time. You're giving him a hard time.

Yes, to say to you, I don't work for Wamo. And I was like, well, okay. And I'm still mad at you though. I was embarrassing. Now, I mean, you know what it was.

It's like because it sounded like he worked for Wamo. Because he was there advocating fiercely for that community. In ways that made me feel like he was part of their team. So yeah. I mean, I was like, okay, you're on the other side of this.

But you're not really on the other side. Because you're sitting on the Wamo panel anyway. So you still part of them.

“I think that if I try to sympathize with the feeling Councilor Maria is expressing here,”

this is how I understand it. It can be annoying when the other side is a mix of people you're allowed to dismiss out of hand. Tech executives, allied with people you're not disability advocates. And when those advocates are all saying similar things, when is your people that sounds like solidarity?

When it's them, it can sound phony, it can sound it orchestrated. But the whole reason I'd found this fight so fascinating is because I thought it was one where you really couldn't easily dismiss anybody. For the people who believe driverless cars will save lots of lives, the human beings with jobs are an unignorable fact.

For the people who want to protect those jobs,

are also an unignorable fact.

This fantasy that there were blind people who were secret lobbyists was tempting because if that were true, it would mean the world was a simple place. It's not. The chair, Councillor Colletta Zapata, said this in the room pretty explicitly.

Nobody'd been paying to be there. I just threw that, but I think for the advocates that have been here and that have provided public testimony, especially maybe from on those in favor of this.

“I think it's important to say that everybody has their own individual agency,”

and they were here on their own accord. Councillor Colletta Zapata, you can see here in the video, shoulder length brown hair, big clear glasses. Like Councillor Mejia, she comes from an activist background. As the hearing closed that day, she'd gone from being just the neutral moderator

to when it was her turn asking the waymo executive a lot of questions. Questions about jobs, but also just questions about the car. How did it work? What happened when a blind person awarded one? How did they find it?

She seemed to be using the hearing to try to get information, which is how I'd been trying to use the hearing, and I wondered if her experience as a participant had been at all like mine as an observer. I just tell you, I don't know if this is a question or just like a statement, when I was watching the hearing, the thing that was annoying.

I felt like on Waymo's side, they were unwilling to engage with the reality of job loss. But on the app driver's union side, I found myself being annoyed because I didn't see them engaging with a question of safety. The idea that these cars could prevent death, or that they could be good for disabled people.

It was like neither side wanted to. They just kept skipping what to me felt like the core trade-offs here, when you talk about this could be really good, or this could be really bad. Yeah, I saw that too, and it's my job. It's all of our jobs as folks that are trying to be thoughtful

and take a comprehensive approach to listen to every side. And that will require a lot of compromise and a lot of consensus,

“but I think that that's good policy-making.”

What do you feel like you need, like if you had a magic wand, to just get exactly the information you want to have, to be able to make a decision about whether autonomous vehicles are right for Boston, what's the data you'd want to see? I love a magic wand question.

Is it always talks about the possibility of getting to a place where everybody's happy,

which I don't think it's ever going to happen, but I would be happy to get more data of if I had a magic wand. How many folks would this employee? How many folks would ultimately lose their job? What would be the exact number of potential crashes

or safety incidences on behalf of Waymo, and how does that stack up to the existing safety and traffic instances that are already happening in the city of Boston? There's a lot. And yeah, how much money is Waymo going to make off of this?

Because I think that's a central question, too. Okay, one company is going to benefit,

“and then there could be hundreds of potentially hundreds of workers”

of the job, and what that means for our local economy. And so, it behooves us as legislators to ask these difficult questions, and to challenge not just these major corporations, but challenge labor unions, and to challenge advocacy organizations, and to try not to get motivated by our passions.

This was the only time in Boston I really heard anyone say this. That to get to a good answer, every single side would need to be challenged. The finding a solution would be refusing to offer any group, blanket, difference. I'd now heard the 20-year story of these cars, and read the safety data,

and I'd done my best in Boston to just listen. In general, I wasn't very satisfied with what I'd heard, but I appreciated Councillor Collette as about as prescription, that everyone tried to calm their passions to ask good questions. And Councillor Mehea, for her part, said that you'd like to bring all stakeholders

to the table, including disability activists. Emily and I left Boston. As we zip down I-95 in a human driven car, talking about what we'd seen, here's where things stood back and being down.

At the end of the second hearing,

the City Council had chosen not to vote on the ordinance, the functional waymo ban that many of the council had spent eight hours speaking full-threaded support of. It seemed impossible they'd noticed that passing an ordinance that so thoroughly excluded the disability community

was not politically wise. The decision on Weimo now seems to be moving to the state level. There, we now have competing bills, one that would approve driverless cars, the other that would require a human being behind the wheel

at all times, essentially a ban. Driving home, I had a realization about what we'd seen there. Emily and I had sat for days with different people who all believed they'd glimpse the vision of the future.

finishing what we've heard started, taking the market for itself.

“Carl had a vision of a future where he drove again”

to the beach with his wife. Counselor Mejia had an ominous vision, where her neighborhood was empty, the people all replaced by machines. Everybody was here in the present,

fighting for, fighting against, a movie playing in their minds. Here's the vision I see. I started to glimpse it in a conversation with a reporter Timothy B. Lee,

who we were talking about the future, he was describing his vision of how things were about to change. He pointed out how today, if a robot driver makes a mistake, footage goes viral online.

But some day soon,

he imagines will be in a situation

where the clips that go viral will be of human beings doing the kinds of things on the road that today, which is tolerate.

“Like, can you believe this maniac is still out to drive?”

I do think that society is tolerance for bad driving is going to go down, so there's been this trend over the last few decades, where the amount of training you need as a teenager is getting a driver's license.

This is big going up. I think that'll continue to go up. And if somebody's caught drunk driving, we're pretty reluctant to take the driver's license away, because they live.

We had Mike dependent on it. But once journalists taxes are cheap, or once you can buy a driver's vehicle, a giant might be more comfortable,

saying like the penalty for your first,

it's just a direct driving. It gets a lifetime ban on driving a car. Like, you can have a driver's kind of the taste wherever you want, but you just can't get behind the wheel. In Timothy's vision, change comes fast.

In about five years, driverless cars are common as we've heard today. In around 10 years, every new car standard just has a waymo package. A robot driver in sensors,

a button, you can press if you don't want to drive. A shared Timothy's vision.

“I believe driverless cars will soon be everywhere.”

Not even just because they're safer, but because of consumer demand, the same force that broke the politician's who resisted Uber out long ago. A lot of AI is like this. Technology too useful to ignore,

even if it causes social pain. If we're going to be okay, we're going to need to envision some new futures, new compromises. New ways to share the dividends of progress

with the people at this place is. There are precedents for this. When containerization put a ton of longshoremen at work in the 1960s, the West Coast Union negotiated to deal.

The employers could bring in the new machines, but they had to pay into a fund that guaranteed the existing workforce wouldn't be laid off and give early retirement payouts to workers whose jobs disappeared.

You could do something like that. You could do a lot of things. But whatever we're going to do, I did not find the seeds of that new compromise in Boston. It also does not exist in DC,

which has been delaying driverless cars with bureaucratic hurdles. Or in New York, where my governor talked briefly about allowing driverless cars than retreated under pressure. But these are the places where a bargain could likely be struck.

These are where drivers, democrats, and teamsters have for a few more years at least, leverage. They should use it, but they'll have to be inventive. They'll have to imagine visions of the future

more vivid than the word now. (upbeat music) , which is a presentation of Odyssey. It was created by me, P.J. Vote, and Truthy,

Pinnominating. Gare Graham is our senior producer, Emily Maltaire is our associate producer. Theme, original composition, and mixing by Armand Bizarrean. Just did a fantastic job on the music in these two episodes.

I can say that. Our production intern is Piper Dumont. This episode was fact-checked by Mary Mattis. Our executive producer is Leah Restennis. Thanks to the rest of the team and Odyssey.

Chris Cox, Eric Donnelly, Con Gainer, more current Joe's feet of friends is Kurt Courtney, and Hillary Schott. Special thanks to Kim Kubel, Alfred Potter, Homer F. Semi, Isabella or Bono, Erica Noel, Alejandra Guerrero,

and all the folks at the Boston SCIU office.

Alex Roy, Karen Levy, Henry Donna,

“and the many other Uber drivers we've dug for this story.”

If you would like to support reporting

like the reporting in these two episodes,

plus get ad free episodes, zero reruns,

and bonus episodes,

“please consider setting up for incognito mode at search engine.show.”

It's how we keep this thing running. Thanks for listening, we'll see you soon. [BLANK_AUDIO]