E-Bikes: An Immigrants'-Rights Issue?

The other day, I admitted that I have aimed an impolite hand gesture at inconsiderate motorists.  I have also used more than a few words, in a few languages (hey, I'm in New York) that aren't fit for a family blog.

(Is this a family blog?)

I have also made those same gestures and hurled those same verbal missiles at e-bike riders who have come out of nowhere and cut across intersections, or in front of me.  Afterward, I feel a little guilty:  After all, I was once a bike messenger and understand how difficult it is to make a living from making deliveries.  I'll bet that some of them, after a day of delivering pepperoni pizzas or Korean tacos, may not have a meal to bring home to their families--or for themselves.

Even though I sometimes wish that all of those e-bikes would turn into real, I mean pedal, bikes, I realize that some of those delivery guys (nearly all of them are male) have to continue in the same line of work even as their bodies are giving out on them.  I also know that nearly all of them are immigrants, some of whom can speak English very little if at all, and may not have many (if any) other marketable skills.

If those guys stopped making deliveries, the city would come to a standstill.  All right, perhaps I'm exaggerating just a bit.  I have to wonder, though, what some folks would do if they couldn't have their diner dishes or trattoria treats delivered to them after a long day at work--or if said meals were to double in price.

So if the problem is not that those workers use e-bikes, what is it?  

Well, not all e-bikes are created equal.  Here in New York, there are basically three classes.  Class 1 e-bikes are the pedal-assisted variety and attain top speeds of 20MPH.  Recently, Mayor de Blasio declared them perfectly legal in this city.  Class 2 and 3 bikes are throttle-operated and not legal in the Big Apple.

You might have guessed where the rub is:  Most deliveries are done on Class 2 and 3 bikes because, well, they're faster and don't require pedaling.  The fine for operating such machines is $500 per day--more than most delivery workers make in a week.  Worse, the police can and do confiscate these bikes, which leaves workers unable to provide for their families--and lots of yuppies and hipsters hungry.

Transportation Alternatives is therefore circulating a petition calling for, among other things, guidelines and requirements--as well as a program that provides financial and practical assistance--for converting Class 2 and 3 bikes to Class 1.  In addition, the petition calls for a moratorium on e-bike enforcement until the regulatory framework has been fully implemented, and the workers, NYPD and public are educated about the changes.

So, while I hope that I won't stop pedaling until someone can stick a fork in me, I don't want to deprive immigrants of income for themselves and their families.  After all, who else will my General Tso's Chicken while I'm binge-watching The Golden Girls?

The Ban On Motorized Bikes In NYC

It's not often that cyclists and motorists agree on something, at least here in New York.

Then again, lots of other people who are neither motorists nor cyclists agree with us, at least when it comes to one thing.

I am talking about motorized bicycles.  Like many other New Yorkers, I have had a close encounters with them--including a time when a rider grazed my elbow when I was walking on a sidewalk around the corner from my apartment.

The rider was, like most motorized bikers, making a delivery for a restaurant.  Just after my encounter with him, he parked the bike.  I tried to talk to him, but we didn't speak any of the same languages.  So I went to the owner of the restaurant, who promised to talk to the guy and the rest of his delivery crew.

That the driver parked so soon after the near-miss, and that I therefore knew for whom he was working, made me more fortunate than others who've had similar encounters with motorized bikes.  So is the fact that I sometimes patronize the restaurant and the owner recognized me.  And, of course, the fact that I wasn't hurt.

Others, though, haven't been so lucky.  And I nearly crashed on my bike once when a motorized biker made a sudden turn in front of me.

More than a few stories like mine, and worse, have no doubt reached the Mayor's office during the past few years.  Perhaps as a response,  Bill de Blasio  recently announced a crackdown on motorized bikes.  When police officers have stopped motorized biker, in some cases, the biker has received a ticket.  Henceforth, said the Mayor, the city will fine owners of restaurants whose delivery workers use the bikes.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I have to wonder how that mandate is carried out.  You see, while it's illegal to operate such bikes in the five boroughs of New York--get this--it's not illegal to own one.  I would guess that some delivery workers own their wheels, but the vast majority of bikes are owned by the owners of the restaurants and other businesses who employ the delivery workers.  So, I have to wonder what will be the charge(s) against the business owners who are fined.

Does that mean the burden of penalties will fall to the riders, most of whom are eking out a living?  

Also, it's been pointed out that some delivery workers, mainly the older ones, can't pedal through an entire shift because of injuries or other debilitating conditions.  De Blasio expressed hope that such workers "could find some other kind of work with that restaurant or business."  There are two problems with that:  1.) Most of the restaurants and businesses are small and have few, if any, other jobs, and 2.) Most of the delivery workers are immigrants, many of whom don't speak English, lack other skills or don't have the documentation necessary to get other employment.

That said, I certainly think motorized bikes should not be allowed on sidewalks and bike lanes.  Ideally, I'd like to see them barred from the streets, too, but implementing such a ban might prove more difficult than the Mayor realizes.

Cycles In The Sky

I took a walk on the High Line (Is that the title of a Lou Reed song?) shortly after it opened.  I enjoyed its green space and overall attractiveness.  But I also had a sinking feeling in my stomach.  About two years later, I realized why:  Upon returning about two years later, it had become, essentially, an elevated version of Times Square with more trees and more expensive lattes. It became an "it" destination for tourists to the Big Apple in a way that the Viaduc des Arts, after which it was modeled, never did in Paris. 

Now, that all might be unrelated to what I am about to discuss, save for the fact that a proposed bicycle highway made me think about the High Line.

No less than Sir Norman Foster, Britain's most prolific architect (and a passionate cyclist) backs a "Skycycle" thoroughfare that would allow two-wheeled commuters and tourists to whisk into, out of and through Central London.  The elevated lanes would be built above existing railroad tracks so that buildings and other structures would not have to be demolished.

On one hand, I like the idea.  One thing I actually liked about riding in the Five Borough Bike Tour, as well as other organized rides, was the opportunity to ride on elevated expressways (and the lower deck of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge) that were closed to automobile traffic.  Although I missed the street-level contact I'd normally experience in riding through some Brooklyn neighborhoods I know well, I enjoyed the views of the harbor and waterfront.

Some might argue that building an elevated bicycle highway might entice people who are intimidated by traffic into riding to work.  That may well be true, if the increase in the number of cyclists following the construction (or, in some cases, segregation) of bike lanes on New York City streets is any indication.  However, as Mark Ames points out in the Sustainable Cities Collective blog, a bicycle highway is probably unnecessary.  He argues that there is plenty of room for cyclists and pedestrians on London Streets, but not for cars.  Therefore, he says, the solution is to limit the number of cars in the central city, which London does through a "congestion surcharge."

Mike Bloomberg floated the idea of such a levy for Manhattan below 60th Street.  It was about as popular as the notion of banning bagels.  The loudest objections came from family-owned construction companies and the like that are based in the far reaches of the outer boroughs but do much of their business in Midtown and Downtown. 

I hope that our current Mayor, Bill de Blasio revisits the idea.  Perhaps he will if he's elected to a second term.  From what I've seen, he is smart enough to realize that if it's simply not possible to squeeze more cars and trucks into Manhattan right now, we might be near that point.  I don't think he'd want to be remembered as the mayor who was in office when Manhattan froze in a state of permanent gridlock.

Then, about all anyone will be able to do is to sip those $15 lattes on the High Line.