Employee Protections Under the Federal Transit Act – What Transit Employers Need to Know

Published

2 years ago

September 30, 2019

Employee Protections Under the Federal Transit Act – What Transit Employers Need to Know

This is the fourth post in a five-part weekly series reviewing the legal landscape for transit employers considering automation. Please click here to see the prior post in this series.

As part of our series on labor law issues for the transit employer considering automation, we turn now to the Federal Transit Act.

In order to acquire, improve or operate a mass transit system, perhaps as part of an effort to automate, a transit authority may seek a construction grant or loan from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Transit Authority (FTA) under the Federal Transit Act. The Act requires, as a precondition to receiving a grant or loan, that an applicant enter into a “protective arrangement” with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) that provides for the preservation of certain employment rights and benefits of mass transit workers.

Protective arrangements must provide for the preservation of rights and benefits under existing collective bargaining agreements. They also require the continuation of collective bargaining rights, the protection of individual employees against a worsening of their positions in relation to their employment, assurances of employment to employees of acquired transit systems, priority of reemployment, and paid training or retraining programs. Before the FTA releases funds to an applicant, the Secretary of Labor must determine that the protective arrangements are fair and equitable and certify that they are in place. There are no provisions for waivers or exemptions from these requirements.

If the transit authority’s employees are represented by a labor union, the transit authority and the union may already be signatory to the National (Model) Agreement. If not, the employer proposes a protective arrangement to the DOL which, in turn, refers it to the funding recipients and the union for negotiation. The DOL has developed a “Nonunion Protective Arrangement” for use with nonunion employers.

Existing Protective Arrangements – the National (Model) Agreement

The National (Model) Agreement requires an employer to give the union at least 60 days written notice of each proposed change that may result in the dismissal or displacement of employees, or rearrangement of the working forces covered by the agreement, as a result of the project. Either party may request immediate negotiations. If no agreement is reached within 20 days, either party may submit the matter to arbitration and a final decision must be rendered within 60 days. Other significant obligations under the Model Agreement include payment of a monthly displacement allowance for a period of up to six years to employees who are placed in a worse position with respect to compensation as a result of the project. Any employee whose place of employment changes and who is required to move his or her residence is entitled to moving and traveling expenses and to his or her actual wage loss. Employees laid off or deprived of employment as a result of the project are entitled to a monthly “dismissal allowance” and dismissed employees are entitled to priority of placement incomparable, vacant positions for up to six years, including training if necessary for the employee to become qualified for the position.

New Protective Arrangements

If there is no previously-certified arrangement, the DOL proposes the terms and conditions found in its “Unified Protective Arrangement.” There is a procedure for either party to submit objections to the recommended terms, but the parties are expected to engage in good faith efforts to reach mutually acceptable protective arrangements through negotiation within certain timeframes. The DOL will impose a protective arrangement when no agreement can be reached.

If neither the grant applicant’s employees nor employees of any other transit provider in the service area are represented by a union, the DOL certifies the protections contained in a “Nonunion Protective Arrangement” developed by the DOL.

The protections found in the Unified Protective Arrangement and the Nonunion Protective Arrangement track those found in the Model Agreement.

Conclusion

An employer’s obligations under a protective arrangement are so extensive and of such duration that they should be considered when an employer evaluates whether to seek funding for automation through a construction grant or loan under the Federal Transit Act.

Our series on labor law issues for the transit employer considering automation continues next week with a discussion of notice requirements under other laws and agreements.

For a more in-depth analysis and overview of the labor law issues discussed in this series, please refer to our white paper, Labor Law Issues in Deciding to Automate Mass Transit Operations.

Source: https://www.fisherphillips.com/autonomous-vehicles-blog/employee-protections-under-the-federal-transit-act

Related Topics:Analysis Automotive funds Law Legal white paper

Blockchain

How NFTs, DeFi and Web 3.0 are intertwined

Published

3 hours ago

April 10, 2021

Republished by Plato

While blockchain itself provides the technology constructs to facilitate exchange, ownership and trust in the network, it is in the digitization of value elements where asset tokenization is essential. Tokenization is the process of converting the assets and rights to a property into a digital representation, or token, on a blockchain network.

Distinguishing between cryptocurrency and tokenized assets is important in understanding exchange vehicles, valuation models and fungibility across the various value networks that are emerging and posing interoperability challenges. These are not just technical challenges, but also business challenges around equitable swaps.

Asset tokenization can lead to the creation of a business model that fuels fractional ownership, the ability to own an instance of a large asset. While discussing asset tokenization in a previous article, I also mentioned the value of an instance economy in democratizing finance, commerce and global access, as well as in creating a broader global marketplace at a scale never before seen.

With digital assets and their fungibility in a blockchain ecosystem, there are various drivers of valuation. These include: 1) tokens based on crypto economic models that are driven by supply and demand, and the utility of the network; 2) nonfungible tokens, or NFTs, which have an intrinsic value such as identification, diplomas and healthcare records — essentially, tokens that are simple proof validations of the existence, authenticity and ownership of digital assets; and 3) fungible tokens that are valued on various bases, such as the sum total of economic activity in the network (cryptocurrency), its utility (smart contracts and transaction network processing), assigned values (stable coins and security tokens), and so on.

In this article, I address the complex issue of the hyperbolic and rapid rise of NFTs, after a similarly meteoric rise of decentralized finance, or DeFi, creating amazing innovations — with immense promise of democratization, new business models and global marketplaces with global access — all fueled by the basic premise of decentralization and fundamental constructs of tokenization and wallets. While NFTs may be characterized as one-of-a-kind cryptographic tokens with some intrinsic value to a holder or to a market (art, collectibles), the NFT movement is indicative of a larger token revolution that will not only fuel massive innovation and growth in Web 3.0 protocols but also test the resolve of the DeFi movement, along with its ability to intersect and provide platforms and an exchange vehicle for all token types.

Growth in Web 3.0 protocols

The first two generations of web protocols were largely about disseminating information and connecting people. They fueled a massive growth in information and collaboration, and did wonders for connecting the world. However, those web protocols were never designed to move things of value. Also, as the Web 2.0 era reached its fullest potential, vulnerabilities such as “fake news” and the “batched relay” of the movement of assets via a series of intermediaries emerged. Threats to the commerce and financial infrastructure of the system risk destabilizing it.

Web 3.0 promises to safeguard all things we value: information, truth and digital assets — both fungible and nonfungible. Whereas Web 2.0 was driven by the advent of social, mobile and the cloud, Web 3.0 is largely built on three new layers of technological innovation: edge computing, decentralized data networks and artificial intelligence.

The growth of NFTs has not only empowered the ability for artists, skilled professionals and entrepreneurs to encapsulate innovation in a tokenized form but has also fueled the democratization of the platform as one of the promises of blockchain technology. The underlying infrastructure includes decentralized storage technologies, efficient consensus protocols, off-chain computing, and oracle networks to provide connectivity and validation to existing systems.

Collectively, the Web 3.0 set of technologies envisions a connected, trustless, accountable network for efficiently delivering value, thus crafting an infrastructure for things of worth. NFTs represent both transferable entities and nontransferable tokens that we value. The latter include things such as our identification, healthcare records and passports, things that represent us and allow us to participate in the digital economy with our own unique, digital identities.

As we dare to envision a shift toward a world with decentralized control, governance based on distributed technology that challenges every business model, and governance structure built upon centralized business frameworks, we do have to ponder some things. Not only the shift itself, but the motivation, incentive and monetization elements that fuel and power the economic infrastructure to move things that have value — thereby keeping up with our changing perception and subsequent realization of that value.

Intersecting with finance — DeFi

DeFi is the movement in the blockchain applications space that leverages decentralized network technology to disrupt and force a transformation of old financial products into trustless, transparent protocols, facilitating digital value creation and dissemination with few to no intermediaries. It is widely understood and accepted that — due to new synergies and co-creation via new digital interactions and value-exchange mechanisms — blockchain technology lays the foundation for a trusted digital transactional network that, as a disintermediated platform, fuels the growth of marketplaces and secondary markets.

While DeFi aims to deliver the promise of finance democratization, NFTs test the resolve of DeFi by delivering a competitive yet inclusive asset class, plus avenues to provide a medium of exchange, fungibility by other fungible asset classes, and liquidity to a traditionally illiquid market.

Asset classes resulting from DeFi protocols and NFTs avail themselves of the advantages of fractional ownership of the assets, blurring the lines between asset classes and using constructs like digital wallets as a receptacle for them. This is all supported by underlying layers of Web 3.0 that provide security and availability via decentralization, as well as trust and immutability via consensus, extending these principles to basic computer infrastructure like storage and interconnect.

Commercialization of Web 3.0 protocols, which manifest as fungible utility tokens, further blurs the lines with diverse financial innovation products introduced by DeFi (such as base assets and derivatives), products that are also tokenized. So, while decentralization is the underlying theme — and the wallet and the token are fundamental constructs — these blurring lines are quite profound.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Nitin Gaur is the founder and director of IBM Digital Asset Labs, where he devises industry standards and use cases and works toward making blockchain for the enterprise a reality. He previously served as chief technology officer of IBM World Wire and of IBM Mobile Payments and Enterprise Mobile Solutions, and he founded IBM Blockchain Labs where he led the effort in establishing the blockchain practice for the enterprise. Nitin is also an IBM Distinguished Engineer and an IBM Master Inventor with a rich patent portfolio. Additionally, he serves as research and portfolio manager for Portal Asset Management, a multi-manager fund specializing in digital assets and DeFi investment strategies.

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/how-nfts-defi-and-web-3-0-are-intertwined

Blockchain

Has the rally ended for altcoins like LINK, ADA, and NPXS?

Published

3 hours ago

April 10, 2021

Republished by Plato

With most altcoins rallying at the current point in the market cycle where Bitcoin is making a comeback, there are a few altcoins that may have ended their price rally. Among these, LINK ranks in the top 10 cryptocurrencies based on market capitalization.

LINK’s oracles may have filled the void left from the removal of XRP from Grayscale’s fund. However, that does not seem to have had an impact that would last long enough to boost the price on spot exchanges. The asset is currently trading at the $32 level, down from its ATH. Though there is anticipation that the price will rally to its ATH, the dropping trade volume across exchanges signals otherwise.

After being added to Grayscale’s fund, LINK’s price went up steadily, however, a boost from institutional demand may not be enough to boost the asset’s price. 93% HODLers are profitable before the asset takes a dip in the current cycle

The altcoin rally may have ended for LINK, ADA and NPXS

Grayscale LINK Holdings || Source: Bybt

LINK’s institutional demand has had only a partial impact on price, and the trend reversal depends on the HODLers profitability at the current price level and the rally of altcoins led by ETH. Historically, Bitcoin’s rally has had a negative impact on LINK’s price and that remains to be seen as Bitcoin traders above $60000 once again this weekend.

Another top altcoin, Cardano has offered HODLers an ROI of over 440% in 2020. This altcoin has been considered to be the one to HODL in the long term based on on-chain analysis and trader sentiments. In the current cycle, 65% HODLers are profitable at the price level of $1.23. This is one of the top altcoins in which the concentration by large holders is low, below 50%, currently at 24%.

Additionally, at this point in the rally, there is a significant drop in ADA’s trade volume across exchanges. This drop in liquidity may lead to a drop in price over the following week. Though large transactions in the past week have been above $30 Billion, the volume is dropping consistently.

ADA price chart || Source: Messari

Unlike ADA and LINK, in the case of NPXS, the price is back to the same level as a month ago. The 24-hour trade volume has taken a plunge with a near 100% drop in 24 hours, and this is a unique position in NPXS’s price cycle. Moreover, the on-chain sentiment is bearish and this may be the ideal time to buy altcoins like these that are consolidating. The confidence is consistently high in top markets on spot exchanges, and the dropping trade volume is a sign of consolidation.

Sign Up For Our Newsletter

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://ambcrypto.com/has-the-rally-ended-for-altcoins-like-link-ada-and-npxs

Blockchain

Kraken Daily Market Report for April 09 2021

Published

3 hours ago

April 10, 2021

Republished by Plato

Overview

Total spot trading volume at $1.02 billion, down from the 30-day average of $1.34 billion.
Total futures notional at $417.0 million.
The top five traded coins were, respectively, Bitcoin, Tether, Ethereum, Ripple, and Polkadot.
Strong returns from Waves (+23%), Basic Attention Token (+17%), Keep (+13%), and Filecoin (+12%).

April 09, 2021 $1.02B traded across all markets today Crypto, EUR, USD, JPY, CAD, GBP, CHF, AUD
XBT $57928. ↓0.21% $379.8M	USDT $0.9996 ↓0.02% $197.7M	ETH $2060.0 ↓1.0% $115.3M	XRP $1.0285 ↓2.9% $70.9M	DOT $40.512 ↓2.1% $27.6M
ADA $1.2002 ↓1.6% $24.8M	WAVES $16.972 ↑23% $20.9M	USDC $1.0000 ↑0.02% $20.8M	FIL $173.42 ↑12% $20.7M	LTC $219.62 ↓3.0% $16.3M
XTZ $6.6226 ↑7.5% $13.4M	LINK $31.279 ↓4.6% $12.5M	BAT $1.5112 ↑17% $11.8M	TRX $0.1153 ↓6.5% $11.7M	SC $0.0296 ↑0.6% $10.9M
MANA $1.0222 ↑2.9% $10.6M	XMR $275.91 ↑2.1% $9.67M	BCH $630.11 ↓2.1% $7.69M	XDG $0.0611 ↓1.1% $7.48M	XLM $0.4833 ↓4.4% $7.44M
OMG $10.224 ↑0.04% $7.33M	KSM $448.87 ↓2.6% $7.11M	EOS $6.1909 ↓4.1% $6.45M	ALGO $1.3699 ↑1.3% $6.04M	STORJ $2.5171 ↓3.8% $5.37M
ATOM $20.952 ↑2.0% $4.96M	FLOW $35.168 ↓0.5% $4.69M	UNI $29.463 ↓2.5% $4.36M	NANO $5.6553 ↓0.07% $3.24M	QTUM $15.518 ↓7.3% $3.24M
KEEP $0.7752 ↑13% $3.09M	ZEC $192.44 ↑4.2% $2.58M	OCEAN $1.7433 ↓4.4% $2.54M	ICX $2.6261 ↑5.7% $2.36M	LSK $7.0662 ↑2.8% $2.36M
KAVA $6.9189 ↓4.9% $2.33M	OXT $0.8013 ↑1.0% $2.17M	DASH $264.69 ↓1.1% $2.14M	CRV $2.9409 ↓4.2% $1.96M	DAI $1.0001 ↓0.01% $1.95M
COMP $451.87 ↓0.8% $1.89M	YFI $45278. ↓4.2% $1.66M	GRT $1.7240 ↓1.7% $1.64M	REP $55.361 ↑9.9% $1.56M	ANT $12.048 ↓0.6% $1.5M
AAVE $358.40 ↓3.3% $1.47M	REPV2 $55.869 ↑9.2% $1.19M	KNC $3.3166 ↓0.15% $1.15M	SNX $19.258 ↓3.3% $1.1M	ETC $18.662 ↓4.8% $875K
EWT $17.223 ↓4.9% $867K	MLN $96.553 ↑5.3% $704K	PAXG $1747.8 ↓0.9% $655K	BAL $51.559 ↓4.0% $387K	GNO $169.66 ↑1.3% $134K
TBTC $60244. ↑1.2% $26.7K

#####################. Trading Volume by Asset. ##########################################

Trading Volume by Asset

The figures below break down the trading volume of the largest, mid-size, and smallest assets. Cryptos are in purple, fiats are in blue. For each asset, the chart contains the daily trading volume in USD, and the percentage of the total trading volume. The percentages for fiats and cryptos are treated separately, so that they both add up to 100%.

Figure 1: Largest trading assets: trading volume (measured in USD) and its percentage of the total trading volume (April 10 2021)

Figure 2: Mid-size trading assets: (measured in USD) (April 10 2021)

Figure 3: Smallest trading assets: (measured in USD) (April 10 2021)

#####################. Spread %. ##########################################

Spread %

Spread percentage is the width of the bid/ask spread divided by the bid/ask midpoint. The values are generated by taking the median spread percentage over each minute, then the average of the medians over the day.

Figure 4: Average spread % by pair (April 10 2021)

.

#########. Returns and Volume ############################################

Returns and Volume

Figure 5: Returns of the four highest volume pairs (April 10 2021)

Figure 6: Volume of the major currencies and an average line that fits the data to a sinusoidal curve to show the daily volume highs and lows (April 10 2021)

###########. Daily Returns. #################################################

Daily Returns %

Figure 7: Returns over USD and XBT. Relative volume and return size is indicated by the size of the font. (April 10 2021)

###########. Disclaimer #################################################

The values generated in this report are from public market data distributed from Kraken WebSockets api. The total volumes and returns are calculated over the reporting day using UTC time.