20 ms·

Uber is not being banned just because of this rape incident. Uber did not following Indian laws & Delhi transport regulations, and operated illegally under the

Uber is not being banned just because of this rape incident. Uber did not following Indian laws & Delhi transport regulations, and operated illegally under the radar. Before this incident, Delhi Government was not aware about how Uber operated. This incident prompted Indian authorities to investigate the operations of Uber. Uber's stance is that we are not a taxi company, we are an app company; so we do not need to follow transportation laws. Uber is so secretive in India that the only way users can contact Uber is through Twitter. They don't provide any phone number, email or address. Moreover, Delhi police had to struggle to get in touch with Uber. They called an Uber cab using the App, and asked the driver to take them to Uber's office. When they reached office, it was almost empty. There was nobody who had any information about what is going on. Uber claims they have a driver screening process, but it seems they skip through the due diligence process in India to save few bucks. https://www.uber.com/safety https://www.uber.com/safety "Uber is committed to connecting you to the safest ride on the road" Driver Screening: http://blog.uber.com/driverscreening http://blog.uber.com/driverscreening which includes: Criteria for drivers to pass through Uber’s screening, going back seven years: - No DUI or other drug related driving violations or severe infractions* - No Hit and Runs - No fatal accidents - No history of reckless driving - No violent crimes - No sexual offenses - No gun related violations - No resisting/evading arrest - No driving without insurance or suspended license charge in the past 3 years Unfortunately, Uber does not perform this due diligence while recruiting drivers in India. The alleged driver had previously served 7 months in prison for rape charges, that didn't stop Uber from recruiting him.

GrinningFool 12y ago
No sexual offenses From the article: "Uber, which had employed the driver even though he had been arrested on allegations of sexual assault three years ago" THe implication there is that he had not been convicted of any offense - which means no sexual offense was [in the eyes of the law...] committed. I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand yeah, he was arrested for it and convicted or not, that's probably a risk Uber shouldn't be taking. The other side of that an accusation or suspicion isn't a reasonable basis on which to ruin someone's employability.
- laichzeit0 12y ago
  There really ought be no two minds about this. If he was acquitted and you don't give him a job soley because of that fact it would be unfair discrimination.
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 12y ago
    I wouldn't hire George Zimmerman or Darren Wilson for any job.
    - jessaustin 12y ago
      If I were in a position to hire/not hire those characters, I would definitely stipulate that they may not bring a gun to work...
      - RealGeek 12y ago
        Would you hire them to look after black kids?
        jessaustin 12y ago
        Frankly I don't envision them in any public-facing role, let alone dealing with kids. However, there are numerous jobs that don't require regular contact with the general public.
        deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
        smtddr 12y ago
        If I found out my black son & daughter were being looked after by one of those two....
  - GrinningFool 12y ago
    Not necessarily acquitted though - could be the case hasn't come to trial yet, or some pressure was applied somewhere along the way that would never show up in a background check.
pyrois 12y ago
I don't quite understand the wording on the website. The article said the driver was acquitted; would a proper screening still have disqualified him, given his acquittal? Quick disclaimer: clearly, given what you said, Uber needs to dramatically change how it operates in India, and thorough background checks are hugely important for a commercial transport service. I'm just wondering if it would have been enough to prevent this particular crime from happening.
- RealGeek 12y ago
  If Uber didn't hire this driver, this crime could have been prevented. Delhi laws require all cabs to have an onboard GPS: "The vehicle must be fitted with GPS/GPRS based tracking devises which must be in constant communication with the Central Control unit while the vehicles is on duty." Uber didn't even have an on-board always on GPS, their only way to track is through mobile app; which the driver conveniently turned off.
  - mike_hearn 12y ago
    How would that have achieved anything? You want a Minority Report-esque flying police department that drops themselves onto the road if the driver veers off route?
    - what_ever 12y ago
      It seems to be doing okay with other cabs which have been operating for much longer.
      - mike_hearn 12y ago
        Can you provide evidence for that? It seems common sense that a GPS unit, even one that cannot be disabled, would only be useful as evidence to follow up on after an alleged crime took place. I don't see any way to use it to prevent a crime happening in the first place.
        12y ago
yummyfajitas 12y ago
Very true. If the Indian government were to shut down modes of transportation because of drivers engaging in rape, then you'd never see a rickshaw on the streets. http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/woman-gangraped-thrown-out-of-autorickshaw/ http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/woman-gangra... http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/delhi-13-year-old-girl-allegedly-gang-raped-by-three-autorickshaw-drivers-469553 http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/delhi-13-year-old-girl-al... I've spoken with one woman since this incident. She stills considers radio cabs (taxi4sure, specifically) safer than rickshaws or flagged cabs (i.e., flagging a taxi rather than using an app). It's rather unlikely that banning Uber will do much. I suspect that a Beretta in every purse is the only real solution, but it's also a solution that the government will never support. Only rich people and jewelry stores deserve to be protected by guns.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- adrianN 12y ago
  Plenty of countries don't have guns in every purse without rampant rapists. I think there are different solutions to the problem, like promoting a culture where women are equal.
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    Which do you think will reduce rape right now? A bunch of rapists showing up at hospitals with holes in them, or some sort of education campaign to change the culture? If things can get better in 10 years that's great. I'd also like the women I care about to be safe tomorrow. A few dead rapists is a small price to pay for that.
    - adrianN 12y ago
      If you want to reduce rape right now, you should start by putting more effort into getting rapists in jail. Currently three fourths of the rapists get away scot free. Get the police to do their job, don't force everybody to be their own police.
what_ever 12y ago
He is saying press@uber.com and not Paisa Dooba.
cant-be-serious 12y ago
>The alleged driver had previously served 7 months in prison for rape charges, Only 7 months for rape?
- tehaugmenter 12y ago
  That does seem absurdly low. I would think at least a couple years for a rape charge at the very least.
  - mikeash 12y ago
    He was not convicted.
- tomjen3 12y ago
  When not convicted, that is some serious time.
j45 12y ago
It's ancillary to the discussion, but I'm not sure of the due diligence which can reliably and certifiably be completed in India. There may be assumptions made from a belief that these things are present.
- j45 12y ago
  Rather than down-voting, open to hearing otherwise. Didn't mean to offend, just an understanding of what is possible out there.
avinassh 12y ago
> The alleged driver had previously served 7 months in prison for rape charges, that didn't stop Uber from recruiting him. mostly because he had No Objection Certificate from Delhi Police itself [0] that his history is clean? EDIT: This image could be fake too, I can't trust our Indian media houses either :| [0] - http://i.imgur.com/rwjhHBq.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rwjhHBq.jpg source of [0] - https://twitter.com/timesnow/status/541885210573275136 https://twitter.com/timesnow/status/541885210573275136
- tehaugmenter 12y ago
  Looks like a lazy cop issue is underway in the Delhi Police Department.
- rikacomet 12y ago
  NOC doesn't mean his record is clean, or he is safe to hire. NOC means, that DP doesn't have any issues with him getting recruited anywhere (ofcourse if people with records of served sentence aren't going to get a job, they will get into more shady things). Uber on its own, had to follow its marketing pitch at least(that it checks bla bla bla). But then again, that didn't happen, and that is the basis of the outburst here.
  - avinassh 12y ago
    Well the certificate mentions he has no criminal records.
- shubhamjain 12y ago
  Delhi Police say that the character certificate is fake. The person whose signature appear on the certificate was posted in Mizoram. [0] [0]: https://twitter.com/invincibleidea/status/541951277245005824 https://twitter.com/invincibleidea/status/541951277245005824
shk 12y ago
I know uber is flouting regulatory laws in India but banning the company outright is definitely not the right solution. And again there is the question that how the said ban is going to be imposed. The Union Transport Ministry of India has given a statement saying banning uber doesn't make sense [1] Also, in a developing country like India, with no centralized repository of past records, it's extremely tough to do background checks. [2] It's busy to blame the system, but here the system in my opinion is more at fault than Uber. Clearly, uber provides a net value-add of hailing a taxi over traditional taxi services. Rather than banning them, a better way will be to have a digitized system where past records of a driver can be viewed and making it accessible to all taxi companies. Just strengthening regulations is not enough. There should be clear ways and benefits of operating within the regulatory framework. [1] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Banning-Uber-doesnt-make-sense-Nitin-Gadkari-says/articleshow/45430544.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Banning-Uber-d... [2] http://fortune.com/2014/12/08/in-defense-of-uber-in-india/ http://fortune.com/2014/12/08/in-defense-of-uber-in-india/

GrinningFool 12y ago

No sexual offenses From the article: "Uber, which had employed the driver even though he had been arrested on allegations of sexual assault three years ago" THe implication there is that he had not been convicted of any offense - which means no sexual offense was [in the eyes of the law...] committed. I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand yeah, he was arrested for it and convicted or not, that's probably a risk Uber shouldn't be taking. The other side of that an accusation or suspicion isn't a reasonable basis on which to ruin someone's employability.

laichzeit0 12y ago
There really ought be no two minds about this. If he was acquitted and you don't give him a job soley because of that fact it would be unfair discrimination.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 12y ago
  I wouldn't hire George Zimmerman or Darren Wilson for any job.
  - jessaustin 12y ago
    If I were in a position to hire/not hire those characters, I would definitely stipulate that they may not bring a gun to work...
    - RealGeek 12y ago
      Would you hire them to look after black kids?
      - jessaustin 12y ago
        Frankly I don't envision them in any public-facing role, let alone dealing with kids. However, there are numerous jobs that don't require regular contact with the general public.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - smtddr 12y ago
        If I found out my black son & daughter were being looked after by one of those two....
- GrinningFool 12y ago
  Not necessarily acquitted though - could be the case hasn't come to trial yet, or some pressure was applied somewhere along the way that would never show up in a background check.

pyrois 12y ago

I don't quite understand the wording on the website. The article said the driver was acquitted; would a proper screening still have disqualified him, given his acquittal? Quick disclaimer: clearly, given what you said, Uber needs to dramatically change how it operates in India, and thorough background checks are hugely important for a commercial transport service. I'm just wondering if it would have been enough to prevent this particular crime from happening.

RealGeek 12y ago
If Uber didn't hire this driver, this crime could have been prevented. Delhi laws require all cabs to have an onboard GPS: "The vehicle must be fitted with GPS/GPRS based tracking devises which must be in constant communication with the Central Control unit while the vehicles is on duty." Uber didn't even have an on-board always on GPS, their only way to track is through mobile app; which the driver conveniently turned off.
- mike_hearn 12y ago
  How would that have achieved anything? You want a Minority Report-esque flying police department that drops themselves onto the road if the driver veers off route?
  - what_ever 12y ago
    It seems to be doing okay with other cabs which have been operating for much longer.
    - mike_hearn 12y ago
      Can you provide evidence for that? It seems common sense that a GPS unit, even one that cannot be disabled, would only be useful as evidence to follow up on after an alleged crime took place. I don't see any way to use it to prevent a crime happening in the first place.
      - 12y ago

yummyfajitas 12y ago

Very true. If the Indian government were to shut down modes of transportation because of drivers engaging in rape, then you'd never see a rickshaw on the streets. http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/woman-gangraped-thrown-out-of-autorickshaw/ http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/woman-gangra... http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/delhi-13-year-old-girl-allegedly-gang-raped-by-three-autorickshaw-drivers-469553 http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/delhi-13-year-old-girl-al... I've spoken with one woman since this incident. She stills considers radio cabs (taxi4sure, specifically) safer than rickshaws or flagged cabs (i.e., flagging a taxi rather than using an app). It's rather unlikely that banning Uber will do much. I suspect that a Beretta in every purse is the only real solution, but it's also a solution that the government will never support. Only rich people and jewelry stores deserve to be protected by guns.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
adrianN 12y ago
Plenty of countries don't have guns in every purse without rampant rapists. I think there are different solutions to the problem, like promoting a culture where women are equal.
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  Which do you think will reduce rape right now? A bunch of rapists showing up at hospitals with holes in them, or some sort of education campaign to change the culture? If things can get better in 10 years that's great. I'd also like the women I care about to be safe tomorrow. A few dead rapists is a small price to pay for that.
  - adrianN 12y ago
    If you want to reduce rape right now, you should start by putting more effort into getting rapists in jail. Currently three fourths of the rapists get away scot free. Get the police to do their job, don't force everybody to be their own police.

what_ever 12y ago

He is saying press@uber.com and not Paisa Dooba.

cant-be-serious 12y ago

>The alleged driver had previously served 7 months in prison for rape charges, Only 7 months for rape?

tehaugmenter 12y ago
That does seem absurdly low. I would think at least a couple years for a rape charge at the very least.
- mikeash 12y ago
  He was not convicted.
tomjen3 12y ago
When not convicted, that is some serious time.

j45 12y ago

It's ancillary to the discussion, but I'm not sure of the due diligence which can reliably and certifiably be completed in India. There may be assumptions made from a belief that these things are present.

j45 12y ago
Rather than down-voting, open to hearing otherwise. Didn't mean to offend, just an understanding of what is possible out there.

avinassh 12y ago

> The alleged driver had previously served 7 months in prison for rape charges, that didn't stop Uber from recruiting him. mostly because he had No Objection Certificate from Delhi Police itself [0] that his history is clean? EDIT: This image could be fake too, I can't trust our Indian media houses either :| [0] - http://i.imgur.com/rwjhHBq.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rwjhHBq.jpg source of [0] - https://twitter.com/timesnow/status/541885210573275136 https://twitter.com/timesnow/status/541885210573275136

tehaugmenter 12y ago
Looks like a lazy cop issue is underway in the Delhi Police Department.
rikacomet 12y ago
NOC doesn't mean his record is clean, or he is safe to hire. NOC means, that DP doesn't have any issues with him getting recruited anywhere (ofcourse if people with records of served sentence aren't going to get a job, they will get into more shady things). Uber on its own, had to follow its marketing pitch at least(that it checks bla bla bla). But then again, that didn't happen, and that is the basis of the outburst here.
- avinassh 12y ago
  Well the certificate mentions he has no criminal records.
shubhamjain 12y ago
Delhi Police say that the character certificate is fake. The person whose signature appear on the certificate was posted in Mizoram. [0] [0]: https://twitter.com/invincibleidea/status/541951277245005824 https://twitter.com/invincibleidea/status/541951277245005824

shk 12y ago

I know uber is flouting regulatory laws in India but banning the company outright is definitely not the right solution. And again there is the question that how the said ban is going to be imposed. The Union Transport Ministry of India has given a statement saying banning uber doesn't make sense [1] Also, in a developing country like India, with no centralized repository of past records, it's extremely tough to do background checks. [2] It's busy to blame the system, but here the system in my opinion is more at fault than Uber. Clearly, uber provides a net value-add of hailing a taxi over traditional taxi services. Rather than banning them, a better way will be to have a digitized system where past records of a driver can be viewed and making it accessible to all taxi companies. Just strengthening regulations is not enough. There should be clear ways and benefits of operating within the regulatory framework. [1] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Banning-Uber-doesnt-make-sense-Nitin-Gadkari-says/articleshow/45430544.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Banning-Uber-d... [2] http://fortune.com/2014/12/08/in-defense-of-uber-in-india/ http://fortune.com/2014/12/08/in-defense-of-uber-in-india/