12 ms·

Uber undermining the taxi strike [1] yesterday was pretty visible -- at least in my social circle here in Seattle -- and when Lyft made this announcement we all

by Pfhreak 10y ago

Uber undermining the taxi strike [1] yesterday was pretty visible -- at least in my social circle here in Seattle -- and when Lyft made this announcement we all deleted our Uber accounts. Will that have a material impact on anyone's bottom line? Who knows, but I'd love to see the graphs for new account signups/account deletions. [1] Taxis were not servicing JFK in support of those who were being detained there.

jamalex 10y ago
For convenience, here's a link to the Uber help page for deleting your account: https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a (They even give you a nice box to explain why)
- jasonbarone 10y ago
  For convenience, here's a link to the Lyft help page for deleting your account: https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/223281567-Delete-My-Account- https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/223281567-Delete-My-.... Unforunately, it's not possible to do yourself. Both Lyft and Uber didn't suspend service to JFK last night because both are 24/7 platforms for anyone to drive and make money. Uber lowered/suspended surge pricing to make it affordable in/around the protests, while Lyft did not. Worth noting is that active drivers on both platforms were likely protesting at airports all over the world.
  - banku_brougham 10y ago
    could you post the account setup page please? i've never used lyft, i assume its basically the same service?
    - thesmallestcat 10y ago
      It's an inferior service: Much longer waits for a ride, higher fares, tipping, awkward interactions, fewer ride options, buggy (in my experience) phone apps.
    - gumby 10y ago
      Doesn't operate in as many locations, but pretty much the same, and often the same drivers. Informally it appears drivers I've talked to have preferred Lyft (have asked even when they were driving for Uber). Most of course demur, but I've never heard a driver say something nice about Uber while I have had several praise Lyft.
      - praneshp 10y ago
        Just to give you a counter point, I was in India recently, and most drivers I spoke to loved Uber. That could be a combination of the alternative sucking, general employer treatment of employees not being great, etc.
mozumder 10y ago
Here's the great & intense statement from the New York Taxi Workers Alliance on their JFK strike: "NYTWA STATEMENT ON MUSLIM BAN: Professional drivers are over 20 times more likely to be murdered on the job than other workers. By sanctioning bigotry with his unconstitutional and inhumane executive order banning Muslim refugees from seven countries, the president is putting professional drivers in more danger than they have been in any time since 9/11 when hate crimes against immigrants skyrocketed. Our 19,000-member-strong union stands firmly opposed to Donald Trump's Muslim ban. As an organization whose membership is largely Muslim, a workforce that's almost universally immigrant, and a working-class movement that is rooted in the defense of the oppressed, we say no to this inhumane and unconstitutional ban. We know all too well that when government programs sanction outright Islamophobia, and the rhetoric of hate is spewed from the bully pulpit, hate crimes increase and drivers suffer gravely. Our Sikh and other non-Muslim brown and black members also suffer from anti-Muslim violence. Today, drivers are joining the protest at JFK Airport in support of all those who are currently being detained at the airport because of Trump's unconstitutional executive order. Drivers stand in solidarity with refugees coming to America in search of peace and safety and with those who are simply trying to return to their homes here in America after traveling abroad. We stand in solidarity with all of our peace-loving neighbors against this inhumane, cruel, and unconstitutional act of pure bigotry." From: https://www.facebook.com/nytwa/posts/1562624543751719 https://www.facebook.com/nytwa/posts/1562624543751719
- justinpombrio 10y ago
  I hate asking about downvotes, but I'm really confused why this comment has been pushed to the bottom. Why?
  - jakeogh 10y ago
    Well, it's not a "Muslim Ban" for starters. Look up the countries with the highest Muslim populations, then cross ref to the list of countries that have a 90 day (to start) ban.
    - 3JPLW 10y ago
rashkov 10y ago
I think there's a pro-Uber case to be made here. Uber suspended surge pricing at a time when many people were trying to get to the protest at the airport, and while the airtrain was shut down which is what connects the subway system to the airport. Furthermore Uber offered to compensate its drivers who are affected by the ban, if they get stuck outside of the country. Edit: Maybe Uber mis-stepped by honoring requests for rides FROM the airport, but given the above I don't think they're doing this to grab money. It's actually a little sad to see the knee-jerk response by people lashing out at a company that is trying to help, in this instance.
- EthanHeilman 10y ago
  The taxi strike was part of the protest at the airport. Offering reduced pricing was a way to hurt the taxi workers who were losing money to show solitary with the protest. If Uber was trying to help, they should have said so.
  - rashkov 10y ago
    edit: Re-reading this, and I realize I missed your point. You're absolutely right -- they did not say "we are cutting surge pricing in support of the protest". This was my original post for posterity: "They did say so. This was their tweet: 'Our CEO's reaction to immigration order: "We'll compensate drivers impacted by the ban pro bono for next 3 months." http://ubr.to/standingup'" http://ubr.to/standingup'"
    - pikzen 10y ago
      They're helping their own workers. While a good thing, the rest of ther message is complete PR and sending ubers to JFK undermines the strikes, because it's such an easy way for them to make a profit.
      - nerfhammer 10y ago
        Turning off surge pricing sends fewer Ubers to JFK! They make less money, not more with surge pricing off! Makes no sense!
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
malloreon 10y ago
I'm a bit confused by the backlash at Uber. I saw the tweet saying they were suspending surge pricing to JFK. To me that make trips there less likely since drivers would make less. Wouldn't that be a show of solidarity with the temporarily striking taxi drivers union? I guess my question is, how does suspending surge pricing to JFK suggest Uber supports the executive order?
- koolba 10y ago
  Drivers don't know where they're going till the ride starts. I also don't think they can refuse to go to a destination without repercussions (i.e. Getting kicked out of Uber). If anything, disabling surge pricing lessens the impact of a taxi strike as going to/from the airport is more affordable and convenient then having zero or pricier options.
- 010a 10y ago
  They could have disabled all pickups at JFK in true solidarity. I don't think disabling surge pricing is a show of solidarity. With Taxis striking, surge pricing would have skyrocketed. This feels more like Uber just wants to preempt an inevitable news story about how surge pricing hit 10x or something during the taxi strike, which would be bad PR. The article did say that Uber is working with its affected drivers to provide legal assistance. So, again, they're just protecting themselves. The company has practically no moral compass.
  - jasonbarone 10y ago
    Did Lyft or any other services disable all pickups at JFK in true solidarity?
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Did their workers agree to share that solidarity? Or are you saying they should have forced their workers to join the protest? Were taxi companies prohibiting drivers from picking up passengers?
    - 10y ago
inverse_pi 10y ago
I don't get it. How about other people that were not part of the protest and were trying to get home/get to the airport? How about the Uber drivers trying to make a living? Just because they were not part of your protest you'll give them hate?
- kungfooguru 10y ago
  Yes, it undermines the strike. Strikes are supposed to disrupt.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - benchaney 10y ago
    Strikes are intended to disrupt. They are not entitled to disrupt. There is a huge difference.
    - pikzen 10y ago
      In most professions, there's a feeling of unity. Taxi companies and drivers will either stand with striking drivers, or be respectful enough to not disrupt their action. Then comes Uber, the vulture that swoops in all in the name of disrupting the market. They're allowed to do it, sure. Whether it's morally right is another thing.
      - benchaney 10y ago
        It is definitely morally right. Calling Uber a vulture ignores the reality that the world doesn't stop just because some protesters are unhappy.
        eropple 10y ago
        "Some protestors are unhappy" is a really interesting way of phrasing "the federal government is embarking on a concerted attack on 1.7% of the population for reasons at best murky." Be better, please.
benchaney 10y ago
So protesters are entitled to hold people hostage for an arbitrary amount of time, just because they are unhappy? Give me a break.
- dagw 10y ago
  Where the bus services out of JFK also cancelled?
  - baddox 10y ago
    If they weren't, then the people who condemn Uber for not striking should also condemn the bus drivers for not striking.
- empath75 10y ago
  When you have an administration whose stated goal is to tear the fabric of the country apart, don't be surprised when that is what happens.
- closeparen 10y ago
  We could say the same about the government (in fact, the protesters were saying that).
- danharaj 10y ago
  It doesn't matter if they're entitled or not, they did it, and then Uber did what they did, and people are now evaluating those actions based on the facts and their values. You don't have to agree with every protest. There isn't a universal rule that says all protest is good. But every protest can be judged on its merits, which is what people are doing, not reducing the motivations to "just because they are unhappy". Implying that this protest was started "just because they are unhappy" is disingenuous and refuses to engage with the issues in good faith.
  - benchaney 10y ago
    My point isn't whether this particular protest is "good" or "bad". Even knowing relatively little about this protest, I think that I would likely agree with the protesters. My issue is that I don't see any reason why Uber should be obligated to stop service just because there is a protest going on. A lot of people in this thread seem to feel that having a protest entitles you to ruin other peoples' day and anyone who helps the people you are screwing is a bad guy. I see no good argument that supports that mentality.
reacharavindh 10y ago
I wonder if UBER could do anything evil with its location dara from customers and drivers... like identify who is joining protests and where etc.
pfarnsworth 10y ago
I don't see why Uber needs to be beholden to a taxi strike, since they're not taxis, that holds no meaningful purpose except hurting a large number of people trying to get to and from the airport. Since when do taxis get to unilaterally dictate what the moral way to protest is? Will taxi companies join Uber and help financially support the taxi drivers who are stuck out of the country because of Trump's ban? Are they immoral if they don't follow Uber's lead?
tn13 10y ago
Kudos to Uber and Lyft both here. I had to travel to SFO yday and I managed to find an Uber. Despite protests and all, we need transportation people. I donated money to ACLU.
giaour 10y ago
I deleted my account, too, but I wonder if that was the most effective way to register my discontent with Uber. It was estimated in December that Uber spends about $1.55 for every dollar of revenue they take in [1], so refusing to use Uber isn't exactly hurting their bottom line. On the other hand, I've yet to talk to an Uber driver that doesn't also accept fares via Lyft, and if we can convince drivers to abandon Uber by shifting our consumer dollars to Lyft, then the Uber brand and platform will lose value. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/21/uber-losses-expected-to-hit-3-billion-in-2016-despite-revenue-growth/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/21/uber-losses-expected-to-hi...

by Pfhreak 10y ago

jamalex 10y ago

For convenience, here's a link to the Uber help page for deleting your account: https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a (They even give you a nice box to explain why)

jasonbarone 10y ago
For convenience, here's a link to the Lyft help page for deleting your account: https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/223281567-Delete-My-Account- https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/223281567-Delete-My-.... Unforunately, it's not possible to do yourself. Both Lyft and Uber didn't suspend service to JFK last night because both are 24/7 platforms for anyone to drive and make money. Uber lowered/suspended surge pricing to make it affordable in/around the protests, while Lyft did not. Worth noting is that active drivers on both platforms were likely protesting at airports all over the world.
- banku_brougham 10y ago
  could you post the account setup page please? i've never used lyft, i assume its basically the same service?
  - thesmallestcat 10y ago
    It's an inferior service: Much longer waits for a ride, higher fares, tipping, awkward interactions, fewer ride options, buggy (in my experience) phone apps.
  - gumby 10y ago
    Doesn't operate in as many locations, but pretty much the same, and often the same drivers. Informally it appears drivers I've talked to have preferred Lyft (have asked even when they were driving for Uber). Most of course demur, but I've never heard a driver say something nice about Uber while I have had several praise Lyft.
    - praneshp 10y ago
      Just to give you a counter point, I was in India recently, and most drivers I spoke to loved Uber. That could be a combination of the alternative sucking, general employer treatment of employees not being great, etc.

mozumder 10y ago

Here's the great & intense statement from the New York Taxi Workers Alliance on their JFK strike: "NYTWA STATEMENT ON MUSLIM BAN: Professional drivers are over 20 times more likely to be murdered on the job than other workers. By sanctioning bigotry with his unconstitutional and inhumane executive order banning Muslim refugees from seven countries, the president is putting professional drivers in more danger than they have been in any time since 9/11 when hate crimes against immigrants skyrocketed. Our 19,000-member-strong union stands firmly opposed to Donald Trump's Muslim ban. As an organization whose membership is largely Muslim, a workforce that's almost universally immigrant, and a working-class movement that is rooted in the defense of the oppressed, we say no to this inhumane and unconstitutional ban. We know all too well that when government programs sanction outright Islamophobia, and the rhetoric of hate is spewed from the bully pulpit, hate crimes increase and drivers suffer gravely. Our Sikh and other non-Muslim brown and black members also suffer from anti-Muslim violence. Today, drivers are joining the protest at JFK Airport in support of all those who are currently being detained at the airport because of Trump's unconstitutional executive order. Drivers stand in solidarity with refugees coming to America in search of peace and safety and with those who are simply trying to return to their homes here in America after traveling abroad. We stand in solidarity with all of our peace-loving neighbors against this inhumane, cruel, and unconstitutional act of pure bigotry." From: https://www.facebook.com/nytwa/posts/1562624543751719 https://www.facebook.com/nytwa/posts/1562624543751719

justinpombrio 10y ago
I hate asking about downvotes, but I'm really confused why this comment has been pushed to the bottom. Why?
- jakeogh 10y ago
  Well, it's not a "Muslim Ban" for starters. Look up the countries with the highest Muslim populations, then cross ref to the list of countries that have a 90 day (to start) ban.
  - 3JPLW 10y ago

rashkov 10y ago

I think there's a pro-Uber case to be made here. Uber suspended surge pricing at a time when many people were trying to get to the protest at the airport, and while the airtrain was shut down which is what connects the subway system to the airport. Furthermore Uber offered to compensate its drivers who are affected by the ban, if they get stuck outside of the country. Edit: Maybe Uber mis-stepped by honoring requests for rides FROM the airport, but given the above I don't think they're doing this to grab money. It's actually a little sad to see the knee-jerk response by people lashing out at a company that is trying to help, in this instance.

EthanHeilman 10y ago
The taxi strike was part of the protest at the airport. Offering reduced pricing was a way to hurt the taxi workers who were losing money to show solitary with the protest. If Uber was trying to help, they should have said so.
- rashkov 10y ago
  edit: Re-reading this, and I realize I missed your point. You're absolutely right -- they did not say "we are cutting surge pricing in support of the protest". This was my original post for posterity: "They did say so. This was their tweet: 'Our CEO's reaction to immigration order: "We'll compensate drivers impacted by the ban pro bono for next 3 months." http://ubr.to/standingup'" http://ubr.to/standingup'"
  - pikzen 10y ago
    They're helping their own workers. While a good thing, the rest of ther message is complete PR and sending ubers to JFK undermines the strikes, because it's such an easy way for them to make a profit.
    - nerfhammer 10y ago
      Turning off surge pricing sends fewer Ubers to JFK! They make less money, not more with surge pricing off! Makes no sense!

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

malloreon 10y ago

I'm a bit confused by the backlash at Uber. I saw the tweet saying they were suspending surge pricing to JFK. To me that make trips there less likely since drivers would make less. Wouldn't that be a show of solidarity with the temporarily striking taxi drivers union? I guess my question is, how does suspending surge pricing to JFK suggest Uber supports the executive order?

koolba 10y ago
Drivers don't know where they're going till the ride starts. I also don't think they can refuse to go to a destination without repercussions (i.e. Getting kicked out of Uber). If anything, disabling surge pricing lessens the impact of a taxi strike as going to/from the airport is more affordable and convenient then having zero or pricier options.
010a 10y ago
They could have disabled all pickups at JFK in true solidarity. I don't think disabling surge pricing is a show of solidarity. With Taxis striking, surge pricing would have skyrocketed. This feels more like Uber just wants to preempt an inevitable news story about how surge pricing hit 10x or something during the taxi strike, which would be bad PR. The article did say that Uber is working with its affected drivers to provide legal assistance. So, again, they're just protecting themselves. The company has practically no moral compass.
- jasonbarone 10y ago
  Did Lyft or any other services disable all pickups at JFK in true solidarity?
- icebraining 10y ago
  Did their workers agree to share that solidarity? Or are you saying they should have forced their workers to join the protest? Were taxi companies prohibiting drivers from picking up passengers?
  - 10y ago

inverse_pi 10y ago

I don't get it. How about other people that were not part of the protest and were trying to get home/get to the airport? How about the Uber drivers trying to make a living? Just because they were not part of your protest you'll give them hate?

kungfooguru 10y ago
Yes, it undermines the strike. Strikes are supposed to disrupt.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- benchaney 10y ago
  Strikes are intended to disrupt. They are not entitled to disrupt. There is a huge difference.
  - pikzen 10y ago
    In most professions, there's a feeling of unity. Taxi companies and drivers will either stand with striking drivers, or be respectful enough to not disrupt their action. Then comes Uber, the vulture that swoops in all in the name of disrupting the market. They're allowed to do it, sure. Whether it's morally right is another thing.
    - benchaney 10y ago
      It is definitely morally right. Calling Uber a vulture ignores the reality that the world doesn't stop just because some protesters are unhappy.
      - eropple 10y ago
        "Some protestors are unhappy" is a really interesting way of phrasing "the federal government is embarking on a concerted attack on 1.7% of the population for reasons at best murky." Be better, please.

benchaney 10y ago

So protesters are entitled to hold people hostage for an arbitrary amount of time, just because they are unhappy? Give me a break.

dagw 10y ago
Where the bus services out of JFK also cancelled?
- baddox 10y ago
  If they weren't, then the people who condemn Uber for not striking should also condemn the bus drivers for not striking.
empath75 10y ago
When you have an administration whose stated goal is to tear the fabric of the country apart, don't be surprised when that is what happens.
closeparen 10y ago
We could say the same about the government (in fact, the protesters were saying that).
danharaj 10y ago
It doesn't matter if they're entitled or not, they did it, and then Uber did what they did, and people are now evaluating those actions based on the facts and their values. You don't have to agree with every protest. There isn't a universal rule that says all protest is good. But every protest can be judged on its merits, which is what people are doing, not reducing the motivations to "just because they are unhappy". Implying that this protest was started "just because they are unhappy" is disingenuous and refuses to engage with the issues in good faith.
- benchaney 10y ago
  My point isn't whether this particular protest is "good" or "bad". Even knowing relatively little about this protest, I think that I would likely agree with the protesters. My issue is that I don't see any reason why Uber should be obligated to stop service just because there is a protest going on. A lot of people in this thread seem to feel that having a protest entitles you to ruin other peoples' day and anyone who helps the people you are screwing is a bad guy. I see no good argument that supports that mentality.

reacharavindh 10y ago

I wonder if UBER could do anything evil with its location dara from customers and drivers... like identify who is joining protests and where etc.

pfarnsworth 10y ago

I don't see why Uber needs to be beholden to a taxi strike, since they're not taxis, that holds no meaningful purpose except hurting a large number of people trying to get to and from the airport. Since when do taxis get to unilaterally dictate what the moral way to protest is? Will taxi companies join Uber and help financially support the taxi drivers who are stuck out of the country because of Trump's ban? Are they immoral if they don't follow Uber's lead?

tn13 10y ago

Kudos to Uber and Lyft both here. I had to travel to SFO yday and I managed to find an Uber. Despite protests and all, we need transportation people. I donated money to ACLU.

giaour 10y ago

I deleted my account, too, but I wonder if that was the most effective way to register my discontent with Uber. It was estimated in December that Uber spends about $1.55 for every dollar of revenue they take in [1], so refusing to use Uber isn't exactly hurting their bottom line. On the other hand, I've yet to talk to an Uber driver that doesn't also accept fares via Lyft, and if we can convince drivers to abandon Uber by shifting our consumer dollars to Lyft, then the Uber brand and platform will lose value. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/21/uber-losses-expected-to-hit-3-billion-in-2016-despite-revenue-growth/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/21/uber-losses-expected-to-hi...