Jim Hansen is a labor journalist based in Denver where he edits a union newspaper covering seven western states.
He has written extensively on labor issues. For more than 10 years, he wrote a weekly/bi-weekly labor column for the late, lamented Rocky Mountain News and has had other op-ed pieces in many publications, including the Detroit News and the Denver Post.
It was gratifying to learn that State Representative Jeff Bridges doesn't limit his consideration only to his constituents, John Elway and Peyton Manning, when he beats the drum for driverless vehicles.
He said he has bigger concerns. So we were immediately delighted recently when we began to read Representative Bridge's paean to autonomous transportation conveyances in the Denver Post. Unfortunately, though, that was a snap judgment, made before we completed his guest column.
Bridges failed to mention the two issues that might eventually have the greatest impact on the most people — those who are going to lose their jobs and those who might be victims of insufficient safety protections.
Indeed, organized labor does share Representative Bridges' concern for elderly people who can't drive safely anymore, those who are physically or developmentally disabled, economically disadvantaged or drivers who are easily distracted. Clarinet lessons and Disney vacations are a stretch for us, but we'll be charitable in a search for conciliation.
Organized labor understands that driverless vehicles will eventually be a part of our everyday life, and members don't oppose the development of this exciting concept.
But it is indefensible not to cite unemployment and safety as serious potential problems. It is vital that these issues are considered simultaneously with the development of the industry.
Thousands of workers are wondering how their lawmakers will solve — or try to solve — the unemployment that will be caused by this new transportation concept.
It is expected that a big chunk of the state's economy would be lost when driverless vehicles displace possibly 100,000 workers, including commercial drivers — those who drive trucks, buses, taxis and limousines — and warehouse workers and others.
The average individual wage for workers in the ground transportation industry is $51,000. What will be those workers' destiny when they lose their livelihood?
During the statehouse hearings on driverless vehicles legislation it was easy to reach the conclusion that nobody — except those who will lose their jobs — gives much of a damn about the future of those workers.
There was no mention of retraining or any other form of help for workers displaced by their own tools of work. And Rep. Bridges didn't touch on that in his ode to vehicles without drivers.
Another unmentioned problem will be how the state will replace the economic benefits that will be lost if thousands of workers are put out of their jobs, benefits such as lost income taxes, sales taxes and also revenue losses to businesses they patronize?
A major concern for the public should be safety, which has apparently not been given much thought by the Silicon Valley techies who can figure out almost everything else, especially that which makes money for them.
If history is any indication, safety issues may not be among their priority concerns.
Representative Bridges cites the airline industry as an example of a safe industry. He didn’t, however, mention that while aircraft today is perfectly capable of flying without pilots, history shows it endured perilous and deadly growing periods. It is also noteworthy that modern commercial airliners have two pilots in the cabin at all times.
If autonomous vehicles are allowed to operate on state roads prematurely without adequate rules and regulations, the same type of unintended consequences — involving mostly safety and legal issues — will occur that plagued the airline industry in the early years of commercial air travel.
At that time, most of that industry's rules and regulations were made after fatal airplane crashes. Hopefully, we have learned something since the Wright Brothers’ first flight in 1903, and will avoid the same destructive path to success.
It would be tragic to think of autonomous vehicles only as shiny objects, which is what the Silicon Valley technocrats want us to believe. Beware — especially as Christmas is approaching.
Jim, nice seeing you the other day and glad to see you are doing well. Not sure how to post a letter or respond to Vairma’s column so here is something:
All of Steve Vairma’s suggestions are good ones to try and rein in the Democratic Party from the control of corporate America and the 1%. However, I would add one thing: don’t vote for what I call ‘business Democrats’. I started this last year and for the first time in 45 years of voting did not vote for certain offices. I skipped the Governor, U. S. Senate, and State Senate races here in Colorado. Hickenlooper, Bennett, and Romer did not get my vote. I would now add Mayor Hancock to that list. The argument that they are not as bad as the Republicans no longer holds any water. They are simply taking us down the same economic and social path only at a slightly slower pace. They make no effort to rein in the corportate theft of democracy from the American people. They take no position until corportations say “OK, you can do that little bit.” Witness Michael Benett and the Employee Free Choice Act. He claims to support the rights of workers to organize and will support changes to labor law when corporations agree to something! Yet anthing they agree to will be meaningless.
The problem of the ‘liberal’ democratic party is that they now define liberal or progressive by social issues and pay no attention to the more historical focus on economic justice, fairness and democracy as the cornerstone of progressive thinking. This needs to change. The Occupy Wall Street movement has now put some badly needed focus on this issue. One would hope the Democrats would respond but based on the suppression of Occupy Denver by Hancock and Hickenlooper without any counterbalancing word from any Democratic official indicates that will not happen. They see it as a threat to their corporate contributors without whom they will not make a move. But as the focus on economic justice that OWS has created continues to grow efforts to end the corporate control of our democracy will sprout up. If they are in the Democratic party, fine. If they take other forms that is fine too, maybe even better.
If you need an outlet that the Democrats no longer provide, as I do, then join me and thousands of others every Saturday at noon for the Occupy Denver rally and march.
Steve Bieringer
Democrats personify a Judas that has enabled the Corporate-Government Partnership exploiting the working class to breed and thrive in conjunction with the tax avoidance syndicate. Learn how to combat the betrayal at Solonsays.com.
Many men speak to failure for their insufficient persistence in creating new promises to substitute for those that fail.
The invisible hand of the market always moves faster and much better compared to the heavy hand of government.
x1h9fi