The Problem

Cyclists are a subgroup which consists of a very small number of commuters in New York City. Everyday millions of people have to go places. However, a bicycle, the most environmentally-friendly mode of transportation, cannot compete with the most commonly used vehicle – a car. Hence, cars have an advantage over any other mode of transportation. This makes it, so cyclists are being discriminated against by drivers and car commuters, who make up the most significant percentage of commuters. Although, people’s reliance on cars does not allow biking infrastructure to develop as logically and as quickly as it does in Dutch countries, biking has become a more popular way of commuting in New York City over the last ten years.

On the other hand, the city is not ready to accommodate a significant number of people who use the streets of a car-centric area for cycling. The specific subgroup of cyclists is at a greater risk than the rest of them. This subgroup is delivery workers who have to deal with difficulties of illogically built, disjointed bike lanes every day when doing their job. As cycling becomes more common, the laws around it change. However, why does a subgroup of delivery commuters is being targeted the most?

Background

There are many types of commuters in New York City. However, cyclists are the ones who have to cooperate with safety that city’s bike lanes have to offer. However, there is a big difference of an individual’s experience of biking in the city depending on reasons for such an activity. Cycling commuters have a different kind of experience from delivery workers, who also use bikes for commuting. According to Do Jun Lee and his article Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City, delivery workers are treated unfairly by NYPD, which is shown in many aspects of their everyday life. Moreover, when one’s job is to deliver food, there is not enough time to consider how to make a trip to a destination safely. Only by acting fast can delivery cyclists make enough money for a living.

First of all, there is no safe way for delivering food in New York, because there are not enough bike lanes that can support such various routes that delivery workers have to follow when getting to different locations. The map of Upper West Side shows that residential areas have no or little bike lanes (e.g., see Fig. 1).

(Fig. 1) Green lines on the map are bike lanes.

However, very often food is being ordered to apartments, which makes delivering food complicated because there are rarely bike lanes that can give delivery workers a chance to deliver an order safely. You might think that it would be safer then to drive a car instead of a fragile bicycle. In the city, cars average speeds range from four to seven miles per hour depending on location, which is not fast enough to appease customers who expect their food to arrive in a timely manner (Trottenberg 18). Not being fast enough will also decrease the number of orders that they can deliver. This makes it so purchasing a car will make earnings a net negative investment after factoring in the cost of insurance and parking. Those are the things that companies are not going to cover, and there is a reason for that.

Most delivery workers are Asian or Latinx immigrants who are not being officially recognized as employees (Lee 60). They are not given a vehicle to use for delivery, which means they have to buy their own electric bicycles in order to do their job. It would not make sense to purchase a car for a safer and easier commute.

Other important aspects are the rules and laws that are created around biking. NYC does not consider electric bicycles a hundred percent legal to ride. Even though there is no scientific data confirming that there is any danger in riding an electric bicycle. This is why eventually the city had to make e-bikes legal, but not without limitations that many people are still fighting against. If the bike goes no faster than twenty miles per hour, it is possible to ride it legally. Except, it is only legal when pedal assist is used but not a throttle (Manskar 1). Pedal assist means that a person who is riding an electric device has to pedal for a motor to start helping; if the pedals are not used, the motor is not working either. A throttle, on the other hand, allows a cyclist to press a lever or a button that will gradually allow an individual to go faster, but doing so is illegal. At first such laws seem to make sense, but in reality, many things prove those laws being unthoughtful. It is important to remember that delivery workers have very arduous workdays that sometimes may be as long as sixteen hours a day (Lee 95). Hence, these people have to spend sixteen hours pedaling very fast, competing with cars on the roads, to deliver food on time. It is impossible to pedal for sixteen hours straight. In this case, the throttle is what has to be legalized. However, one may say that twenty miles per hour is very fast, and cyclists should not be able to go nearly as fast as cars. But what if I say that a regular fit cyclist can go up to forty miles per hour without a motor? While electric bikes cannot go any faster than twenty miles per hour in the state of New York, regular cyclists can. And for some reason, the electric bicycles are considered to be illegal, when all they do is make lives of delivery commuters easier and allows cyclists to not arrive at a place all sweaty and tired. Yet, it is very likely that delivery workers are being unfairly ticketed for riding a vehicle that simply lets them survive and earn money (Lee 47).

This leads to a discussion of how delivery workers have a bigger chance to get tickets for breaking the law than other commuters. One of the articles on StreetsBlog by Gersh Kuntzman is an example of how car drivers can avoid a ticket for breaking the rules, while cyclists had to respond for the actions. Gersh tells the story of a cyclist who had to ride on the road because the truck blocked a bike lane. Interestingly, the reason for why an NYPD policeman did not ticket the truck in the bike lane was that he was told by his supervisor not to do it. However, the law clearly states that no vehicles can park in the bike lane even for a short period of time (Kuntzman 1). On the other hand, police have the right to ticket bikers who do not ride in the bike lane although the bike lane may be blocked by a car. Another example of how NYPD does not ticket drivers as often as cyclists happened during my observation at the intersection of thirteenth street and fourth avenue when an NYPD car was parked across the street, while a large Dodge Ram truck was blocking the protected bike lane for ten minutes (see figure 2). The car in the bike lane was not given a ticket during my hour-long observation. What is even more interesting is how delivery commuters have to work in conditions where cars do not respect cyclists in the bike lanes, yet they are the ones being targeted. Perhaps minds of drivers are not ready to share their road with secondary commuters?

(Fig. 2) Green lines on the map are bike lanes. The circled area shows a car blocking the bike lane.

 

Literature Review

Kuntzman, Gersh. “NYPD Cop to Cyclist: I Didn’t Ticket That Truck in the Bike Lane Because

My Supervisor Told Me Not To.” Streetsblog New York City, 20 Aug. 2018, nyc.streetsblog.org/2018/08/20/nypd-cop-to-cyclist-i-didnt-ticket-that-truck-in-the-bike-lane-because-my-supervisor-told-me-not-to/.

This article comes from a biker’s experience and writes about police officer’s action on a truck diver’s illegal activity. A person who is known on Twitter as Chesney Parks approached an officer Adam Blum, and got unsatisfactory respond to why the truck that was blocking a bike lane was not ticketed. Chesney was told that Adam’s supervisor simply said not to ticket a driver for breaking the law. At the beginning of a conversation, as it can be read in the article, the police officer said that such an action was allowed. However, when a cyclist disproved that statement, he was told that it is okay not to have consequences for breaking the law as long as one’s supervisor approves.  While cyclists usually get penalty immediately without warning.

 

Lee, Do J., “Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City” (2018). CUNY

Academic Works. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/2794

Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City is an article written by a graduate student who got a doctorate in The Graduate Center of City University of New York. Do Jun Lee is an environmental psychologist who is known to be a biking activist and Participatory Action Researcher. Many of his works are focused around the issues of cycling in the city. Do Jun Lee writes his works from an emic perspective, which makes his projects to be the part of Participatory Action Research, also known as PAR. This kind of research allows a scientist to not only write about the issue, but take actions, and make changes during the study. PAR is becoming a big part of Environmental Psychology because it allows people to discover various issues and find other individuals who are willing to be part of the community working together towards a common goal. Delivering Justice writes about difficulties around being a delivery commuter. Do Lee’s goal was to spread awareness about immigrant workers who are forced to deal with harsh conditions of both streets of New York and unofficial working experience. His study focuses on the importance of hearing what delivery workers have to say about living up to the demands of businesses they work to while being paid barely enough to survive and support their families.

 

Manskar, Noah. “Some Electric Bikes Will Officially Be Legal In NYC Next Month.” Stone

Mountain-Lithonia, GA Patch, Patch, 28 June 2018, patch.com/new-york/new-york-city/some-electric-bikes-will-officially-be-legal-nyc-next-month.

In June 2018 New Yorkers found out that electric bicycles are going to be officially legalized. If before people could only legally own those devices, soon citizens would also be able to use electric bikes. The article by Noah Manskar writes about the legalization of those electric devices and the boundaries that are going to be created in order to have control over this law. Noah writes that Department of Transportation of New York is ready to legalize pedal assist bicycles in New York City in one month from June. This decision was taken after April’s event when electric bikes were illegally seized by police although they were not in use. Moreover, such actions were taken under Mayor de Blasio’s announcement. Before full legalization of e-bikes, there used to be traps for people who used those modes of transportation. When stopped, they had to pay a $500 ticket. However, after the legalization of electric bicycles delivery workers and other commuters can stop worrying about getting into trouble for riding a bike with a motor.

 

Trottenberg, Polly. Mobility Report: NYC Department of Transportation. New York. Oct. 2016,

New York City Department of Transportation.

Mobility Report: NYC Department of Transportation is an eighteen pages’ explanation of how an experience of New Yorkers has changed since 1910. It provides visual representations of what affects significant increase in the population of New York City has on commuters. The report shows graphs and tables of various modes of transportation and their utilization over the decades. Giving a visual example allows a reader to see a representation of numbers in a more comfortable and explanatory way. The report also writes about the average speed of cars in all of the areas of New York City. How and why this speed was changing over decades and how cycling has become more commonly used than decades ago. Polly Trottenberg commissioned this project in cooperation with Ryan Russo, information about whom can be found in the report.

Objectives

The majority of people in today’s world prefer convenient and safe ways of commuting. Large cities are capable of giving such an opportunity and finding ways to provide buses, subways and other public transportation for millions of people. A better way of commuting is considered to be a car.  A car offers a person space without strangers, comfortable seats and safe metal shield around passengers. Moreover, the roads in most cities are created to accommodate cars, buses, and other four-wheeled vehicles. But what about other, less massive and more ecologically friendly vehicles, like bicycles?
Our planet is under risk of a catastrophic change because of the impact that humans have had on it for many years. It is time to let go of petroleum-based cars and move on to the new, eco-friendly, space-efficient generation of vehicles. Bicycles have proven themselves to be the most efficient mode of transportation. However, such a fact cannot change the street structure and people’s minds in one day. It is difficult to create a city that is safe not only for cars but also for pedestrians and cyclists. Humans have been taught for many generations to treat cars as the best and most convenient choice for commuting. However, lately, a lot of interesting findings came up about how the streets and people’s lives could be changed if only a significant number of cars disappeared from the roads. Yet, people are not ready to let go such a luxury and allow the change to happen. Moreover, cyclists as commuters are being unfairly treated by police and other non-cyclists for several reasons the roots of which are hidden in what seems like unrelated issues. Such as decisions that mayors make, car-centric environment and the lack of logic in street-structure.

With the power of authorities, who support a car-centric mindset, development of safe cycling environments has been slow. Moreover, the laws that are being created have also been treating a large number of bike commuters unfairly. Such behavior only discourages people who decided to make a step forward, to keep going. What does it take to change humans’ perception of cyclists in New York City? As an example, there are Dutch cities that have made a step forward to the future eco-friendly street structure. Many cycling activists say that as long as people have no respect for cyclists, change is impossible. In order for NYC to become a biking-friendly environment, its citizens should learn to respect cyclists and become open-minded to the shift in streets that will give better opportunities for the rest of people.
Improving the safety of bike lanes and creating logical and jointed cycling pathways can make many aspects of citizens’ lives better. When a delivery worker is not risking his life to deliver hot food to various areas, both a worker and a customer can be more satisfied with service and experience. On the other hand, drivers also have a significant impact on the cycling community. Driving a car, people see other commuters much different.
When an individual is in a large metal vehicle, a very small number of things seem to be a threat. Being separated from the rest of commuters by leather seats and loud music, the personal connection with other commuters is lost. This makes it so drivers may behave in an inappropriate way, creating a dangerous situation on the streets. For example, when a cyclist is forced to use the road together with cars, it is likely that there will be no respect for such a commuter. Especially when a car driver feels protected in his vehicle, the actions he or she may take may not be as personal and humane as if his car was, let’s say, transparent. Separation from the environment on the road creates a prejudiced thought process about bikers and other commuters, who have no choice but use the car lane to go places. In order for this thinking to change there should be another way for cyclists not to be the on the way of drivers. Hence, the reinforcement of laws will most likely become fairer when drivers and authorities have more respect and understanding to non-car driving commuters.
Methods
Reinforcement of laws is unfair to cyclist commuters and especially delivery workers. There are three groups of people that may be contributing to this issue. Group one is people who are prejudiced to immigrants. Knowing that many delivery people are unofficially hired to work, some people may not feel good about it. The second group is people who believe, support and spread negative stereotypes or stigmas about cyclists. And the third group is citizens who prefer cars and who are not willing to share their road space with other non-car drivers or commuters if it means that some space may be taken away from them. Having three different groups of people, it seems that there should be different ways to possibly solving or researching the issue. However, the groups have one common thing – bias against cyclists. Which means a researcher can work with that specific area. The research would begin with a test, which would be followed by a lecture and then followed by a similar kind of the test. After all, by the method of correlation, a researcher will see the changes in people’s results from when they took the test for the first time compared to the results of the second test that was taken after the lecture.
It is not easy to find out which citizens belong to the group of prejudiced people and which ones are not. This is why hypothetically all of the people will be asked to take a test called Implicit Association Test (IAT). This test will show any hidden or subconscious bias that people may not have known about.  IAT is a useful tool in situations when people are not aware of what their prejudices are because they are laying in subconsciousness. This is the thought process that influences one’s behavior and thoughts without an individual’s realization. After taking the test, many people may disagree with the result, because many people think they know themselves the best, and no test can teach them anything new about themselves. So after they take IAT, they will have a lecture or an overview on why the test makes sense and how it works. After this, when some people have accepted the fact that their implicit attitudes are negative, they may agree to have a free lecture on how to work with such an issue. After participants take a lecture, they will retake Implicit Association Test to see if there were any changes using correlation. Those whose results showed no prejudice will be free to go, while the ones who were not influenced by the lecture will be able to take a series of free lectures on prejudice and stereotyping. When the majority of people complete a training program, there will be a bigger chance that the negative thinking, that on the global level prevents cycling infrastructure form developing, will be decreased.

Conclusion

The lack of cycling lanes in New York City creates many issues that are standing on the way of improving people’s commuting experience. The problem of poor reinforcement of laws on delivery commuters comes from several factors such as people’s prejudice, unavailability of safe cycling environments and the lack of personal interaction between car drivers and other commuters by creating a better human connection and addressing people’s bias unfair treatment of delivery workers by police. When humans are not able to form a personal, empathetic connection with other people on the street while commuting, it creates a dangerous situation for everyone. By researching the root of a problem and building safer biking infrastructure we can eliminate anger that drivers may hide behind metal doors of a car, and provide an opportunity for people to gain more respect and understanding towards each other. Such a change may improve the experience of delivery workers and reduce stress levels of surrounding commuters.