Should the users of new mobility services have a “Bill of Rights?”
(A series of questions)
My colleagues and I at the Seattle Department of Transportation have been thinking a lot about the user experience of new mobility. This comes out of our work on Seattle’s New Mobility Playbook.
We realized that, perhaps, there should be some sort of New Mobility User’s Bill of Rights to set out what customers and residents can expect from new mobility services. — Should Lyft or Uber tell you that there is a bus nearby that can get you to your destination instead? Should a shared bike include a link to the service record of the bike? Should an autonomous bus have a panic button?
A Bill of Rights could also help us think about the right ways to manage and regulate these services; to assure that these services reduce or, at least, don’t further exacerbate inequality in our cities.
We’re posing a series of questions below related to possible right.. We wrote them as “yes/no” questions, but really we intend them as starting points for your thoughts, suggestions, criticisms — to start a conversation (not the destinations).
Caveat that we realize two things: 1) we’re not sure what agency or institution (public or private) would be responsible for these issues; and, 2) we haven’t asked these questions of the new mobility services currently available in Seattle.
As a further caveat: Please note that this is a thought piece from a group of colleagues. This is NOT AN OFFICIAL S.D.O.T. DOCUMENT or A STATEMENT OF CITY POLICY.
We repeat, THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL S.D.O.T DOCUMENT or A STATEMENT OF CITY POLICY. (Just a little group CYA…)
We’re just sharing, and we invite you help us think through these issues.
What are our rights as users of new mobility ?
When using or availing of any technology enabled transportation service (“new mobility”), should we have a right to:
OPTIONS AND FARES
Should we have a right to know what other transportation options are available and what prices/fares are available? (And, should this information available in our preferred language?)
Should we have the right to expect multiple payment options so that, while we may not have all the payment options available, we are provided an option that is convenient and accessible to us?
Should we have the right to be protected from price gouging and monopolistic behavior?
SURVEILLANCE
Should we have a right to be informed if the service or vehicle we are in is using surveillance and tracking our behavior and movements?
USE OF DATA
Should we have the right to know what data is being collected about us and our behavior and movement?
Should we have the right to know who is collecting the data or who the data is being shared with and used for?
Should we have the right to opt out of data collection and, unless there is a clear and present danger to the general public, the right to decide how that data will be used?
Should we have the right to be informed of how the service may be degraded or improved by the data collection?
Should we have the right to all publicly-owned, publicly-procured and/or publicly-provided data used by the service or the vehicle?
As a parent or a legal guardian, should we have the right to information (including locational information) when we procure the service for our children, or any child or adult under our guardianship?
DATA BREACHES AND HACKING
Should we have the right to be informed immediately if the service provider or vehicle has been hacked or breached? (Including a right to be compensated for damages?)
Should we have a right to guaranteed protection against hacking and data breaches?
A CLEAN ENVIRONMENT
Should we have the right to know how our ride will impact the environment, or congestion, or the quality of life of our community, or of other externalities our ride may be generating or exacerbating?
Should we have a right to access mobility services that improve or mitigate environmental degradation and safeguard clean air, clean water and a clean environment?
FAIRNESS AND EQUITY
Should we have the right to a service that provides equal access to all and does not discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, creed, color, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, age, height, weight, physical or mental ability, veteran status, military obligations, and marital status?
Should we have a right to a service that strives to provide equitable services across our community’s geography (not discriminating by neighborhood income or demographics, nor on payment type or membership)?
Should we have a right to a service that does not use its intellectual property (IP) to discriminate against specific groups of users?
FAIRNESS IN FARES AND PRICES
Should we have the right to know fares and fare schedules?
Should we have a right to non-discriminatory fares that do not overly privilege those who can pay more nor overly encumber those who can only pay less?
Should we have a right to be treated the same as any fare paying customer regardless of our membership or payment type (subsidized or otherwise)?
Should we have a right to know what the current fare is and how much this varies from regular fares?
Should we have a right to recourse for unsatisfactory service?
COMFORT AND DIGNITY
Should we have right to ride in comfort and dignity?
Should we have a right to be protected (and rescued) from harassment and molestation, particularly in shared rides?
Should we have a right to a service that:
— has equitable pricing for its fares and services?
— allows us to communicate in the language or mode that works best for us?
Should we have a right to a vehicle that:
— is regularly cleaned, and is kept clean and hygienic?
— provides accommodations for the people of varying physical abilities and mobility, including parents with children?
— provides affordances for neurodiversity?
SAFETY AND SECURITY
Should we have a right to safe vehicle, that:
— adheres to national, state and local safety regulations?
— has been inspected, with the record of the inspection readily available for viewing?
— can display or make available the service and crash (and failure) history of the vehicle upon request?
— can display or readily make available the record of how reliable the vehicle is, including average delay, speed and/or frequency?
— has reasonable protections against possible injuries in case of collisions or equipment failure or human error?
— makes our rights under the service visible and legible and available in various translations?
— meets ADA standards and can and reasonably accommodate mobility aide devices, children in strollers or car seats, and aging customers?
Should we have a right to a safe service, that:
— includes a readily available way to contact emergency services?
— provides immediate emergency response and protection?
— employs providers that have been vetted for safety and dependability?
INFRASTRUCTURE
Should we have the right to infrastructure or access to infrastructure that provides multiple transportation options to help us access necessary services and provide the mobility we need to get where we want to go?
ENJOYMENT OF PUBLIC SPACE AND THE PUBLIC REALM
Should we have the right to enjoy public spaces and public amenities without hindrances or stress (such as too much noise) coming from or generated by new mobility vehicles (including new technology for delivering goods or services) or services that degrade our enjoyment?
What can we do if the vehicle or the service is detrimental to public health or is a public nuisance?
PERSONALLY OWNED MOBILITY
Should we have the right to own and use our own vehicle subject to the safety and transportation regulations of the US, the state and the local municipalities where we operate our vehicles?
DENIAL OF SERVICE
Should we have the right to know why we were denied service or eliminated from accessing particular new mobility services?
REDRESS
Should we have the right to easily accessible and available channels for submitting our personal experience and concerns with about deficient service and the right to expect the provider to answer or redress our concerns?
Should we have the right to an end-user license agreement that does not require us to enter arbitration and preclude any legal action to address our complaints?
HUMAN OR AI OPERATOR
Should we have a right to know if the vehicle and the service are operated by humans and/or by artificial intelligence?
If it’s operated by artificial intelligence, should we have the right to request a human override of the system?
That’s our draft so far.
Tweet or share your suggestions. (You can tag me on twitter @benjiedlp or @seattledot).
The Seattle DOT team that contributed to this draft include: Evan Corey, Naomi Doerner, Becky Edmonds, Josh Feit, Tracy Krawczyk, Mafara Hobson, Sam Marshall, Ben Smith, and Cristina VanValkenburgh.
Special thanks to Kate Garman of Seattle IT and to Sue Zielinski.
