5 ms·

Every time there is any discussion about the number of employees at a large company there is some comment like this. Whether it be Uber, Airbnb or twitter. No

by yibg 7y ago

Every time there is any discussion about the number of employees at a large company there is some comment like this. Whether it be Uber, Airbnb or twitter. No large organization is going to be 100% efficient with their workforce, but what's more likely? 1) They (and judging by HN comments, every large company) just massively over hired without realizing it or 2) running a global company is more complicated and involves more moving parts than it appears on the surface.

rightbyte 7y ago
I guess it is 1. If your competetive edge is running a slick taxi operation, having that many employees seems ... counterinuitive. That is probably why Uber gets a "what are they all doing" alot.
- meddlepal 7y ago
  Compliance with local laws, localized marketing, localized support, localized administration, etc. It adds up quick.
- yibg 7y ago
  In the same way Netflix is just a slick tv station, google is just a slick search engine and amazon is just a slick e-commerce site. Calling Uber’s operation just a “slick taxi operation” doesn’t hold water and purposely ignores all the complexity operating at scale and globally entails. I mean how many corporate employees would you have if you ran Uber?
  - rightbyte 7y ago
    Amazon does logistics, Netflix does their own content and Google mainly do advertising and is surely not a slick search engine. Neither are slick. Uber on the other hand is an app together with some driver administration. The main operation of the taxis are on the drivers.
    - yibg 7y ago
      How many customer support agents do you think it takes to support millions of drivers and almost 100 million monthly riders across the globe in various languages? How many people in operations to onboard the drivers that come in and deal with local regulations? How many internal tools to automate as much of those processes as possible?
    - colinmorelli 7y ago
      Uber operates in: ride sharing, food delivery, bike messenger, corporate travel, freight, helicopter, and gig economy jobs, and more - and these are just the publicly launched products. Each of those lines has its own external _and_ internal products, with their own features, and their own regulatory burden. They each have their own cost structure and incentive models. They're live in over 900 cities across 85 countries, many of which have their own local regulatory burden such as NYC. Then, on top of that, you've got 91 million monthly active users. Assume each one takes only one ride per month, and only 1% of them have some kind of issue that requires them to reach out to support - that's still 30,000 new issues per day many of which will require coordinating between both parties involved in the transaction. Do they have more employees than they need? Define need. It's easy to hire above what's necessary to sustain operations when the cost of capital is cheap. More people can develop new products and grow margins for the business overall. But Uber is seriously far from "an app together with some driver administration" any more than Amazon is "a website with some seller administration."
    - jbn 7y ago
      w.r.t "Uber is an app together with some driver administration" : this is true, but taxi drivers (even highly organized ones, such as taxi companies that have employees for drivers) are intrinsically incapable of producing something like the Uber app and operating it at scale. Uber did bring something to the taxi industry that it never had.
imtringued 7y ago
If they can lay off 20% of their employees then it appears that 1) is true. Overhiring 5400 employees isn't just about something being "more complicated".
- pm90 7y ago
  This isn’t really a useful line of reasoning. It’s true that businesses will cut their workforce to remain a functioning business, and just that fact does not imply there was “waste”. Longer term investments are cut, which can affect the competitiveness of the business. Corners are cut where they can be. Is it a productive use of Ubers time trying to hyperoptimize their finances versus focusing on their actual business?

by yibg 7y ago

rightbyte 7y ago

I guess it is 1. If your competetive edge is running a slick taxi operation, having that many employees seems ... counterinuitive. That is probably why Uber gets a "what are they all doing" alot.

meddlepal 7y ago
Compliance with local laws, localized marketing, localized support, localized administration, etc. It adds up quick.
yibg 7y ago
In the same way Netflix is just a slick tv station, google is just a slick search engine and amazon is just a slick e-commerce site. Calling Uber’s operation just a “slick taxi operation” doesn’t hold water and purposely ignores all the complexity operating at scale and globally entails. I mean how many corporate employees would you have if you ran Uber?
- rightbyte 7y ago
  Amazon does logistics, Netflix does their own content and Google mainly do advertising and is surely not a slick search engine. Neither are slick. Uber on the other hand is an app together with some driver administration. The main operation of the taxis are on the drivers.
  - yibg 7y ago
    How many customer support agents do you think it takes to support millions of drivers and almost 100 million monthly riders across the globe in various languages? How many people in operations to onboard the drivers that come in and deal with local regulations? How many internal tools to automate as much of those processes as possible?
  - colinmorelli 7y ago
    Uber operates in: ride sharing, food delivery, bike messenger, corporate travel, freight, helicopter, and gig economy jobs, and more - and these are just the publicly launched products. Each of those lines has its own external _and_ internal products, with their own features, and their own regulatory burden. They each have their own cost structure and incentive models. They're live in over 900 cities across 85 countries, many of which have their own local regulatory burden such as NYC. Then, on top of that, you've got 91 million monthly active users. Assume each one takes only one ride per month, and only 1% of them have some kind of issue that requires them to reach out to support - that's still 30,000 new issues per day many of which will require coordinating between both parties involved in the transaction. Do they have more employees than they need? Define need. It's easy to hire above what's necessary to sustain operations when the cost of capital is cheap. More people can develop new products and grow margins for the business overall. But Uber is seriously far from "an app together with some driver administration" any more than Amazon is "a website with some seller administration."
  - jbn 7y ago
    w.r.t "Uber is an app together with some driver administration" : this is true, but taxi drivers (even highly organized ones, such as taxi companies that have employees for drivers) are intrinsically incapable of producing something like the Uber app and operating it at scale. Uber did bring something to the taxi industry that it never had.

imtringued 7y ago

If they can lay off 20% of their employees then it appears that 1) is true. Overhiring 5400 employees isn't just about something being "more complicated".

pm90 7y ago
This isn’t really a useful line of reasoning. It’s true that businesses will cut their workforce to remain a functioning business, and just that fact does not imply there was “waste”. Longer term investments are cut, which can affect the competitiveness of the business. Corners are cut where they can be. Is it a productive use of Ubers time trying to hyperoptimize their finances versus focusing on their actual business?