3 ms·

Given that Uber already uses a pretty similar version of this system for drivers (it's based on star ratings as well), and riders are just as potentially biased

Given that Uber already uses a pretty similar version of this system for drivers (it's based on star ratings as well), and riders are just as potentially biased as drivers, unless you have a problem with using ratings for eligibility on both the supply and demand side, this isn't a strong argument. The comparison with the taxi law is apples and oranges: a single taxi driver can make the unilateral decision to discriminate, while in Uber's system, it would require systemic discrimination across all of the drivers in a given city. While I'll grant that it's possible, if it reaches that point, there should be grounds for a lawsuit alleging disparate impact (which I believe is an established concept when applied to private businesses that was incorporated in the Warren Court years, although there's more gray area here, so I may be off the mark).

crazygringo 7y ago
If Uber were considered an actual employer, and the US had stronger protections for employment (instead of at-will) then that would make sense -- there's a good argument it should be illegal to fire you merely because customers rate you badly because they don't like your hairstyle or where you come from. But I'm particularly basing my original argument on the fact that dispatch car services easily become a natural monopoly or duopoly, so customers don't have choice and they need to get around the city. Whereas driving is a relatively low-skill and low-paying job, of which there are many many others in our service economy -- tons and tons of service jobs. My point is that if you lose your job driving for Uber, you can find another decent-enough substitute job because there are literally thousands of companies hiring. If you get banned from riding Uber, there may be no good substitute because there are only a handful of public transportation options at most, and at a given time/place Uber might be the only one.

crazygringo 7y ago

If Uber were considered an actual employer, and the US had stronger protections for employment (instead of at-will) then that would make sense -- there's a good argument it should be illegal to fire you merely because customers rate you badly because they don't like your hairstyle or where you come from. But I'm particularly basing my original argument on the fact that dispatch car services easily become a natural monopoly or duopoly, so customers don't have choice and they need to get around the city. Whereas driving is a relatively low-skill and low-paying job, of which there are many many others in our service economy -- tons and tons of service jobs. My point is that if you lose your job driving for Uber, you can find another decent-enough substitute job because there are literally thousands of companies hiring. If you get banned from riding Uber, there may be no good substitute because there are only a handful of public transportation options at most, and at a given time/place Uber might be the only one.