Los Angeles is at a crossroads in its fight for equitable, sustainable transportation. The city’s Metro Bike Share system, a critical piece of its transit network, could soon fall into the hands of Lyft—a company with a long track record of exploiting workers, undermining public transit, and prioritizing profits over people.
Last year, after intense pushback from labor unions, transit advocates, and community organizers, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) canceled a controversial $130 million, 11-year contract with Lyft to operate Metro Bike Share. But the battle isn’t over. Reports suggest Lyft has reapplied for the contract, and if awarded, it would give the rideshare giant control over a public service while continuing its harmful practices.
This isn’t just about bikes—it’s about corporate influence over public infrastructure, the erosion of workers’ rights, and the future of transit in LA. Metro must reject Lyft’s bid and instead invest in a bike share system that truly serves riders and workers—not corporate shareholders.
Lyft’s Anti-Worker Record: Wage Theft, Union-Busting, and Exploitation
Lyft has spent years fighting to keep its drivers classified as independent contractors rather than employees, denying them fair wages, benefits, and labor protections. In 2023, California’s Labor Commissioner sued Lyft for over $1.3 billion in stolen wages and expenses, marking one of the largest wage theft cases in state history.
But Lyft’s abuses don’t stop there:
- Union-busting campaigns: The company has aggressively fought efforts by drivers to unionize, spending millions on lobbying and legal battles to block worker protections.
- Misleading drivers: Lyft has repeatedly promised higher earnings while quietly slashing pay through algorithm changes and hidden fees.
- Protest suppression: In cities across California, Lyft drivers have staged strikes over unfair pay—only to face retaliation from the company.
Why would Metro trust a corporation with this track record to manage a public bike share system? If Lyft is willing to exploit its own drivers, how will it treat the workers maintaining, rebalancing, and repairing bikes across LA?
Lyft’s History of Undermining Public Transit
Beyond its labor abuses, Lyft has actively worked against public transit expansion—despite claiming to support “sustainable” mobility.
1. Funding Anti-Transit Ballot Measures
In 2022, Lyft helped bankroll a campaign to defeat San Francisco’s Proposition L, a ballot measure that would have taxed ride-hail companies to fund bus service. The measure would have generated $25 million annually for the struggling San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), preventing devastating service cuts.
But Lyft, alongside Uber and DoorDash, flooded the campaign with an “avalanche of cash” to kill the proposal. Their motive? Protecting profits at the expense of public transit riders.
2. Lyft’s CEO Admits Bike Share Is Just a Gateway to More Car Trips
Lyft isn’t in the bike share business to promote cycling—it’s in it to steer riders back to cars.
In a 2018 interview, Lyft’s then-CEO John Zimmer openly admitted that bike share systems are a way to “get more people into the Lyft platform”—meaning more ride-hail trips. This aligns with studies showing that ride-hail companies increase traffic congestion while draining riders from buses and trains.
If Lyft takes over Metro Bike Share, it could:
- Prioritize bike placements near high-profit ride-hail zones rather than transit hubs.
- Neglect low-income neighborhoods, where bike share is most needed but least profitable.
- Push riders toward Lyft’s ride-hail app instead of integrating with Metro’s transit network.
This isn’t speculation—it’s Lyft’s business model.
The Metro Bike Share Contract Is Lyft’s Trojan Horse Into LA’s Transit System
Metro Bike Share should be a public good, not a corporate profit center. But Lyft’s involvement risks turning it into:
1. A Data-Mining Operation
Lyft could use bike share ridership data to target ads, manipulate pricing, and push riders toward its ride-hail services—turning a public system into a private marketing tool.
2. A Tool to Undermine Unions
If Lyft operates bike share, it will likely classify mechanics and warehouse workers as gig contractors, denying them fair wages and benefits. This sets a dangerous precedent for Metro’s entire workforce.
3. A Way to Weaken Competing Transit Modes
By controlling bike share, Lyft could strategically reduce bike availability near bus and rail lines, pushing riders toward its ride-hail services instead.
What LA Metro Must Do Instead
Metro has a choice: reward a bad corporate actor or build a bike share system that truly serves Angelenos.
1. Reject Lyft’s Bid
Metro should disqualify Lyft from the bidding process due to its history of labor violations and anti-transit lobbying.
2. Partner with Worker-Friendly Operators
Instead, Metro could work with:
- Nonprofit bike share providers
- Unionized transportation operators
- Local cooperatives that prioritize community needs over profits
3. Integrate Bike Share with Transit—Not Ride-Hail
Bike share should complement buses and trains, not compete with them. Metro must ensure:
- Seamless fare integration (TAP card compatibility)
- Bike stations at transit hubs
- Affordable pricing for low-income riders
The Bottom Line: LA Deserves Better
Lyft has proven, time and again, that it cannot be trusted with public infrastructure. From wage theft to anti-transit lobbying, its business model is fundamentally at odds with Metro’s mission of equitable, sustainable mobility.
LA Metro must stand with workers and riders—not corporate greed. The bike share contract should go to an operator that respects labor rights, strengthens transit, and serves the public good.
Call to Action:
- Contact Metro Board members and demand they reject Lyft’s bid.
- Support unions and transit advocates fighting for a fair system.
- Spread the word—share this article and hold Metro accountable.
Los Angeles’ transportation future is too important to hand over to a company like Lyft. The time to act is now.
Leave a Reply