Engage labor early and address accessibility issues at the outset when considering partnering with new mobility services.

Experiences of two transit operators in entering service delivery partnerships with a Transportation Network Company (TNC) and with a micro-transit operator.

January 2017
Pinellas County; Florida; United States; Kansas City; Missouri; United States

Background (Show)

Lesson Learned

This report details the experiences of two transit operators who have entered into service delivery partnerships with a TNC and with a micro-transit operator. The report provides the following key takeaways for transit operators exploring the potential of partnering with TNCs (i.e. Uber or Lyft) and micro-transit (i.e. Bridj or Via).
  • Consider defining best practices and rules of engagement for the transit industry. TNCs and micro-transit options are new to the market and the concept of partnerships has just recently emerged. As a result, the transit industry has not yet defined best practices and standards for entering into such relationships. Without common industry guidelines, engagements between TNCs and transit agencies can be inconsistent, even within the same region. Lack of consistency can breed confusion and frustration for both the agency and the private sector partner, and can even lead to the dissolution of potential partnerships.
  • Look for guidance in interpreting regulations. The regulations are inconsistently interpreted at the transit operator level, in part due to an outdated regulatory framework. A lack of a framework or guidance for applying laws, regulations, and guidance designed for fixed route bus and rail modes to emerging on-demand modes such as TNCs and micro-transit has led to de-facto interpretation and decision making on a localized and case-by-case basis. Interviews with various transit agencies engaging with TNCs, including PSTA and KCATA, revealed that each had a different interpretation of how to apply Title VI, Environmental Justice (EJ), ADA, and drug and alcohol testing rules and regulations in their partnerships with TNCs. Without clear guidance it is extremely challenging to enter into legal partnerships with TNCs or other technology enabled transportation companies.
  • Engage labor early. The experience in Kansas City highlighted the need to engage labor early when considering partnering with new mobility services. Kansas’ experience provides precedent for how to develop mutually beneficial labor contracts for Bridj service delivery. However, partnerships will likely be slightly different in each region introducing micro-transit, and therefore transit operators should include additional negotiation time within their deployment timeline. In the case of PSTA, when partnering with Uber they were unable to engage organized labor to provide those services. This is a function of the TNC business model, where Uber serves as a technology platform rather than an employer.
  • Address the need for accessibility at the onset. Currently, there is no clear method for ensuring the availability of vehicles capable of transporting individuals in wheelchairs on a TNC or micro-transit platform. Both transit operators and TNCs have noted that ensuring wheelchair accessible vehicles (WAVs) are available on the platform is challenging. Uber and Lyft are currently working on providing WAVs on their platform, but this service is not yet robust and is not necessarily in compliance with ADA requirements. This is also a challenge that the micro-transit industry faces. Within the Kansas City/Bridj partnership, the Bridj fleet includes two vehicles capable of transporting individuals in wheelchairs.

Lesson Comments

No comments posted to date

Comment on this Lesson

To comment on this lesson, fill in the information below and click on submit. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field. Your name and email address, if provided, will not be posted, but are to contact you, if needed to clarify your comments.


Partnerships with Technology Enabled Mobility Companies: Lessons Learned

Author: Westervelt, Marla; Joshua Schank; and Emma Huang

Published By: Transportation Research Board

Source Date: January 2017

URL: http://docs.trb.org/prp/17-05056.pdf

Lesson Contacts

Lesson Analyst:

Liz Greer
(202) 551-1164


Average User Rating

0 ( ratings)

Rate this Lesson

(click stars to rate)

Lesson ID: 2018-00806