Ok so Uber laid off 8% of the workforce. Apparently they haven't PIPed many people in recent years so this was supposed to be long overdue.
But the larger point I want to make and ask all you angry negative folks is - why tf are you against ride hailing? I personally want both Uber and Lyft to succeed. The taxi industry was doing a terrible job of meeting customer demand. Uber and Lyft have both made my life so much easier. It is not some social media app where I go to get likes. Many of us rely on these services regularly. I own a car and I still use Uber for many things. I would probably use it even if the prices went up by 10-15%. And guess what, so will all of you especially when you're travelling. Drivers are NOT regular full-time employees. This AB5 is an absurd socialist populist move by politicians. They should get adequate coverage but they certainly don't deserve full time benefits. I feel like all of this is just hate being spread against ride hailing by traditionalist and protectionist forces that want to keep the racket of taxis alive.
If you think taxi drivers weren't being exploited earlier, please go read about the corrupt NYC taxi medallion system which is a real disaster. Is being a slave to taxi companies and their labor unions a better alternative? Do you really think these taxi companies were in it for the drivers? Despite being contractors they now probably have better conditions, which doesn't mean Uber/Lyft can't do more for them.
Wake the f up folks, we're all consumers here . And ride hailing is real innovation using software.
Constructive comments appreciated. Trolls GTFO.
Ok so Uber laid off 8% of the workforce. Apparently they haven't PIPed many people in recent years so this was supposed to be long overdue.
- Amazon / Eng SmkWdEvyDyBecause, though I use it regularly and would be personally hurt by it failing, I also see it as a flawed, exploitative model that should change or fail.
At the end of the day, I really don't think healthcare should be provided by employers at all. It should be completely free for everyone (subsidized by taxes, obviously) and provided by the government. Since we don't have that, we should compel employers to ensure it is provided.
- Twitch / Ops SaraCThe only reason we've had relative peace is because weve managed to prove mutually assured destruction between major world powers.
So what happens now is mostly a show of force to remind other people what could happen if we fucked with each other.
This means proxy warfare, in poor ass countries like Syria, where a global super power like Russia will try to win influence by supporting the existing government, and another super power like the US will try to go topple the "tyrannical" government. Add in a few other big powers like Saudi and Iran, you've basically royally fucked the country into endless conflict that mostly harms the poor average person that had nothing to do with the conflict in the first place. And then without a clear winner, extremist groups like isis start to take over because hell, ain't nobody else doing anything.
- Twitch / Ops Fusoe839That's a very shady and slippery slope. That's like saying the playground bully is necessary because by beating the shit out of a poor kid, breaking his nose on the playground, and beating his face into a pulp until you can barely recognize the human being left in the mangled mess of a body left bleeding on the ground, is somehow a necessity to keep everyone in check, and to make sure that there is order in the playground society before the big boys all break out and then there's chaos everywhere.
Maybe it is. But why the fuck does the poor kid have to be the scape goat? He didn't do anything wrong, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, minding his own goddamn business digging sand in the sand bar and building sand structures with his own toys. The bully just went in and beat the living out of him to show everyone else how tough he is so no one else would mess with him or his friends ever again.
And sure, life isn't fair, we live in a world where the strong prey upon the weak and that's consistent across the animal kingdom. Maybe we don't have a better short term solution. But it's shitty
Second, the assumption above is that wars are necessary. Perhaps it is, just like capital punishment, as a tool to keep nations in line. But neither situations are good. At best, you can only say that it's the least shitty of two terrible options. To say that it's for the greater good is a mockery of the bleakness and tragedy of war.
- It's hard to be sympathetic to corporations that label legal loopholes(getting contractor classification) as "disruption" and using shady tactics to grow. Southwest is in an extremely regulated industry(far more than Uber's) yet somehow we managed to grow and be extremely profitable while being the most unionized US airline and also treating our employees and customers very very well. Having to be a scumbag corporation is not some de facto requirement to be massively successful. Oh and btw, last I checked even with all the scumminess, neither Uber nor Lyft are profitable 🤣
- Lyft iDgz85What do you see the future as? Given the push into self driving by multiple car manufacturers, is self driving going to be a commodity, along with the services on top? Or do we think self driving will be the domain of a few aka cruise, waymo, Tesla etc?
I felt engineering gives one a moat, but Netflix is an example that's not true, and even though Lyft and Uber have invested a lot in building services and optimizing everything, building services is going to be easy for whoever has the resources to build self driving. Given how disloyal customers generally are (barring Uber haters), it'll be easy for a new comer with self driving to vertically integrate and build services.
- @vfst76 spoken like a junior in the industry. The big comp is to be able to attract top talent. The fact that they weren't firing for so long, is also to attract top talent.
There are many options for top talent in today's market and if you want the best product you need them.
Whether or not you actually find the right people and are able to execute is on leadership.
Comp is by far not their problem.
- @DRandomv2 then what could be the reason for their loss all the time? I know only compensation can’t be the whole reason by it’s stupid to keep burning money and keep showing losses. You see UBer and Lyft everywhere. I know they are investing in self driving cars, and other projects but I believe it’s the system that has been created for these companies to just keep showing losses. May be people at Uber or Lyft can point out ... what’s going on. It’s the competition that is causing them to hire talent at higher compensation but I have seen enough companies who think they are doing great but they are just not managing it right. May be I am still a novice to know how the hell it works in industry now a days... just saw someone post with 10 yoe and 450k Tc... Gosh ! I wish the guy is super ... and derseve that
- Uber/Lyft have facilitated a frivolous lifestyle that *seems* to be a need. No one really needs Uber/Lyft. We will all be fine without it, or paying more for the service when we really need it, which will enable paying drivers an actual, career-meaningful, small business wage instead of a "joke wage". Uber should be thinking along these lines - enabling people to create sustainable, profitable businesses (how could that not go over well internationally?) - instead of luring them along into a swirling vortex of wage despair, surrounded by eddies of false hope. A lot drivers have moved to the US to drive for Uber and are effectively trapped into doing it - just wait for the documentaries and PBS investigations. The amount of drive time needed to support a family precludes any meaningful career pursuits, education, or other training, simply due to the relentless exhaustion from horribly stressful driving/traffic for 14 hours/day, sitting in a chair without time to even go to the restroom. If you ask a doctor, sitting in a chair all day is *terrible* for your health. This is tech hell: even if the banal everyday reality is "fine", it's an insidious, society-shaping force. Maybe purgatory is a better term for it. But it's definitely not a force of good in the world.
There are other points as well:
- The actual experience of requesting, waiting for, riding in an Uber, and instructing the driver how not to drive erratically/speed/miss directions or street signs is extremely unpleasant. No one actually likes the process. Ask people if they actually like it. Everyone likes being driven, but Uber requires quite a bit of effort, attention, and inconvenience just to make it happen (constant cancelled rides, frictional pickups, etc. not to mention you need battery, connectivity). It caters to a tech-savvy market: it must be super hard to use for non-tech people. I've seen many people start crying at the airport after not being able to get their Uber app to work or find their driver.
- As a "tech habit" Uber and Lyft are addicting and incredibly costly: SF residents often take Uber/Lyft to commute every day, adding up to $6k or so a year that are often regretted expenses.
- There are at least 8 other ways of getting to a destination. If you're drunk you can call a cab. Or maybe don't get drunk so often that you need to pay for a special service to take care of you.
- Uber/Lyft also cause horrendous traffic in urban areas and this is well-documented. Really, your service lets cars turn on their hazard lights and bring traffic to a standstill in the middle of a busy street just to pick someone up?
- I can't imagine how stressful it is to be a driver and deal with real aggression all day long from other drivers, and impatient passengers who can't find the pickup point. I'm not talking about people doing this to save up for their first house, I mean people who do this full-time to support their families while also doing night school. It seems like complete hell.
- Hmm, my apologies, I'll agree that this post is in no way incoherent AND it answered the original question. Agree or disagree, this does achieve the intended purpose. And while I, somewhat vehemently, disagree with your points I am absolutely glad you did post it. Sorry, now I'm off topic.
- I understand the hate towards Uber (or Lyft). I don't agree with all of them necessarily, but I understand.
I don't understand the hate towards Uber employees here on blind. Why?
- Uber employees have a reputation as arrogant, drunk fratboys, like the west coast equivalent of NYC midtown finance douchebags.
- Marin Software xOCX31I checked linkedin. The assholes that joined are still working there. Unless Dara changed the person that i knew, theyre still assholes. But us in the tech community thank you for assembling the greatest collection of tech assholes the world have ever seen. Glad it blew up in yo face. Stay there please and make the rest of the world a happier place
- Facebook irqL16Cause the founder/former CEO is a misogynist frat boy douche who created a toxic culture? And they take advantage of lower class workers?
- I thought it is obvious. We Californians love overpriced shits: iPhone, Tesla, houses older than all of us, 10% income tax for things other states get for 0%, and surely old taxicab.
Uber and Lyft don't fit in here.
- If you didn't realize.
1. A lot of Uber drivers bought new cars to just do Uber full time. They have monthly payments so they have no option but to make money even if it means driving more and more hours. When they did that, Uber was paying them good money but now they have been severely cutting their cut. It's not like Uber didn't mandated clean cars and not like it didn't benefit from it. So you guys should have realized sometime ago and discouraged this behavior but instead you guys gamified the app to make the drivers drive more and more. This is all very well documented in the articles by New York times done about gamification of the app.
2. It's not an obsession per say but Ubers management behavior has been that of a typical "Bro" aka it's all about you guys. The open flouting of new law and saying that drivers are not core to the business is one e.g.
Anyways, I don't believe anything at the company is going the change because changing business would mean the valuation would be cut to pennies and no management is going to do that.
And lastly, have some empathy for people especially the ones who survive on a weekly paycheck, they are much worse then us who make six figure salaries.
- “And lastly, have some empathy for people especially the ones who survive on a weekly paycheck, they are much worse then us who make six figure salaries.”
Idiot, how will those people like it if Uber and Lyft completely shut down due to no profitability eh? You will then demand unemployment benefits for them to be taken as a % of our paychecks?
- You can stop telling people to have empathy for your straw man when you have none yourselves. I can play that argument too.
How's about the working students who can only drive on the weekend? The retired part timers? The consumers who will be forced to pay more for their rides? Any empathy for them too?
- Cisco 1029384756Microsoft - I personally don’t have any hate for ride sharing companies and most people would want them to succeed if they can deliver a valuable service at a competitive price while being fair to their employees. Therein lies the catch - their business model isn’t very sustainable if they treat their employees fairly. And the drivers are employees -given the number of hours they work for Uber Lyft etc. these guys work much more than 40 hours and they should get their benefits.
I personally do not think these companies do well without mature self driving tech. At least not at the scale they operate at currently.
Another suggestion - if you label people who are asking for fair treatment as socialists, it exposes your (severe) biases and don’t help your case. If you want a healthy discussion, that’s not the way to go about it.
- If my pay was cut in the greatest jobs market of the last 4 decades while the working class is realizing real wage growth for the first time in a long time? I’d quit. Which is why I don’t buy it. I don’t see people doing this full time. I see them doing it after work or on weekends to bring in a little extra.
- 'We' know. They are our users. We background check every single one of them. They come into our hub for onboarding and all ongoing customer services. We know a lot more than some random riders sitting in their car for 5 minutes.
Your claim that most of them are fulltime is the only bullshit. If 50% of all Uber drivers drive for more than 40 hours per week, that would add up to 2x the total driving hours of the whole US population. Do you realize how stupid you sound now?
- Wayfair / Eng tAcq10@tonyeast like most platforms, the vast majority are "lurkers" who barely drive, and a small minority of full time workers are doing the lion's share of the work. I take ride-sharing almost every day and almost every time I ask, my driver tells me they drive full time. So either they're lying or you are. 🤔
- @Wayfair: No it is not either they are lying or I am lying. It is either you are lying or common sense is lying. The number doesn't add up. What you call "lurkers" are gig workers who are using the platform the exact way they are supposed to. Even so, what do you propose Uber should do with those "lurkers"? Screwing them up for the benefits of your full time users. Why do you have no empathy for them?
- California is beating even Europe in socialism lol. Nobody even in Europe introduced such law AFAIK.
OP you are using logic, do you think left uses logic?
So many people will be jobless if Uber/Lyft announces no business in California for even a month. And no, a competitor will not emerge, it's costly business & compliance is costly & consumers will be stuck with expensive taxis or crappy BART or no Public transport.
- Uber and Lyft are fine for consumers (aside from their contribution to traffic problems). But people are more than mere consumers. They are also workers who get by selling their labor, or capitalists who get rich buying their labor and pocketing profits.
Capitalists are always looking to reduce their labor costs so they can pocket more money. When they succeed in doing so, prices drop for consumers, but so do wages for workers. Think Walmart employees making shit wages buying cheap products.
Companies like Uber and Lyft provide a technology whose primary feature is allowing capitalists to reduce their labor costs. In other words, turning generally well-paid, even unionized taxi drivers into low cost freelancers. Convenience for consumers is what they point to to justify what is primarily a transfer of bargaining power and wealth from drivers to the capitalists who own the platform. It’s the same as the Walmart thing.
The other thing that’s more unique to Uber is that they are actually unable to turn a profit. They are trying the Amazon strategy of burning an unfathomable amount of capital to keep prices so low that they undercut the competition and put their competitors out of business, becoming a monopoly, at which point they will have the leverage to raise prices and lower wages enough to become profitable. This strategy is unlikely to succeed for many reasons, but the cracks are starting to show and it will probably collapse sometime in the next few years if I had to guess.
Here’s a detailed look at Uber’s case if you want to learn more: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/05/ubers-path-of-destruction/
- Sometimes unions get coopted by the industry’s capitalists. But a healthy Union is literally comprised of the workers the union represents.
The idea of “The Union” being some corrupting outside force is a distortion that management works hard to spread. Management tries to corrupt union leadership, then points to the corruption that they created as proof that unions are bad. Like all propaganda it’s less about outright lying (unions can be corrupt) and more about placing emphasis in such a way that responds to their benefit. All statistics show that union membership is enormously beneficial to workers in the entire industry, not just the unionized shops, if you want to get empirical.
The last thing management wants is to have to negotiate with workers as equals. Much better to keep bargaining at the individual level where the worker has almost no power.Sep 14 8
- > When they succeed in doing so, prices drop for consumers, but so do wages for workers. Think Walmart employees making shit wages buying cheap products.
Sure, but the right way to solve this problem is not to legislate paying workers more, which creates insane market inefficiencies with all kinds of nth order effects that most politicians don’t even attempt to foresee, but rather to create a system where people who are willing to work hard have opportunities to re-skill or up-skill and move into higher-productivity/higher-wage jobs.Sep 15 2
- Apple EaTW73@reddit I agree legislating living wages to those who no longer produce enough values is harming everyone. But retraining also doesn’t work for these people very well. I believe we need to have a system that gives everyone some cushion while they figure out what they want to do *by themselves.* Govt programs can’t be the solution for this.
This is why I strongly support Andrew Yang. He realizes all these advancements are adding more values to our economy, with less people. And this is good. But millions of people are being left behind. We need to provide UBI so they can pick themselves up all the while supporting their local economy.
- @EaTW73 I think going primetime with full basic income before we study it more in larger experiments would be a mistake, but it’s definitely an idea that merits broader experimentation. I do worry that for some segment of people the problem is not lack of resources but lack of motivation, and basic income doesn’t solve that and may in-fact make it worse. This would also be at the expense of redirecting that money towards more productive use cases. All things we could investigate with further study.
I am also excited about more applications of ISAs. There is no reason these have to be limited to programming schools. There all kinds of applications in trades and other areas for which there are labor shortages. We may be able to fund living expenses while training people in those areas, helping them find jobs afterwards as well. All of this with aligned incentives too, assuming these new schools continue to bear the risk of their graduates finding jobs, unlike our current education loan system.
- Uber and Lyft specifically state the drivers are not meant to be full time employees and you are free to drive as much or as little as you want. They used to actively discourage you from doing so, if you are making a living out of driving for a ride share service then you are not using it as intended or designed. It was never meant to be a taxi alternative and isn't in many ways still. I've tried to get rides many times when bars close and there is simply no one available or the wait is an hour or more so I just use a taxi, it's more expensive with abysmal customer care even now. It's like riding in the back of a cop car with about as much leg room and hospitality from the driver. Taxi companies deserve to fail for the 0 fucks hey give for the consumers experience even as they complain about Uber and Lyft.
The entire model was supposed to be a side gig to make extra money or to make some cash when you drive accross town. I'll turn on Lyft and put in a one way destination and pick up one or two people on the way if I'm driving downtown and make 10-15 bucks and do the same thing on the ride home and if I'm bored on a weekend day I'll drive for a few hours. That's the entire model of how it's supposed to work.
Tldr; if you are using Uber and Lyft as a replacement for a full time job then you are the one in the wrong not them.
- Even forcing them to treat drivers as employees of any kind will mean the loss of extra income for tens of thousands of people and a massive erosion in the freedom and lifestyle those who do it now experience. The service would also go to shit as there would be far fewer drivers making about the same but would cost way more to the consumer. So you'd kill the innovation, the side income for thousands and the freedom working for them entails all for an ideal. The drivers are going to be offered shitty high deductible insurance plans and be forced to have set schedules. It'll just be a taxi with an app employing lower income wage earners pretty much exclusively.
- SAP dwEC83if it is a side gig model, why dont they limit drivers hours? thats easy no? they wont cuz it benefits them. just posturing and lip service.
they are both dishonest exploiting people in need to make extra cash to meet ends. even with exploutation they are still unable to make money muahahaha
- I don’t think anyone is truly anti-ridesharing. It’s more that the companies have consistenly rode on the backs of the drivers through exploitive practices of them and the consumers, while not trying to better conditions for the drivers, their cities infrastructure, or the industry as a whole. While all of the bad things happen, there’s always this big lobbying or advertisement push to spin it as an entrepreneurial exercise for the drivers, adding to the green economy, and helping cities with transportation congestion issues. Those are all lies. The ask most people have is for the industry leaders to be self conscious and try to be better and that’s a fair ask, especially because this is what the shared economy was supposed to be about. I mean the cab industry is bad because of the pressures on drivers and medallion investments, but cab driving in some cities is a legitimate livelihood with protections — a taxi driver will be reimbursed for expenses like gas and insurance. https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/11/28/fare-deal-how-the-hourly-earnings-of-uber-and-taxi-drivers-measure-up-infographic/#1705516e689a
A good way to think about it:
Early Days of ridesharing — driving as a side hobby / extra cash; no full time expectations
Hypergrowth and ridesharing wars — price slashing and surge experiments that would hurt the driver’s end pay, campaigns encouraging full time exclusive driving and making the drivers seem like full time employees, intense rating rules on drivers (at one point drivers had to keep driving and sustain a rating about 4.8 or 4.9 for either company), lobbyist campaigns that would be against driver’s interests but written as if in driver’s interests
Because of the war, the IPOs, and the politics, with the full time (40+ hr a week) driving pressures, it’s fair for the drivers to make the asks. I think it would be better if Uber and Lyft offered two types of driver employment — full time and committed with benefits vs. hobbyist/casual drivers
- There is a cap on it. Uber also turns off surge in particular area during public distress. Sadly it can't always do it in timely manner for everyone. Let's be fair here. Our algorithm can't detect public distress fast enough so there will always be some people initially get surged. No one can do it that fast.
- Idiot, use your brain: surge pricing IS GOOD. It incentivizes more cabs to operate in that region at that time and thereby provides liquidity. In fact the more cabs that make use of surge pricing, the more competition will reduce the said surged prices. Get rid of surge pricing and you’d be twiddling your thumbs waiting without a ride.
- Pay minimum wage + gas money + maintenance money to your drivers and the hate will go away. People will always be willing to pay more rides but your volume will go down, which means your valuation will be cut to pennies, which means Dara won't make enough money since the valuation won't be going to $100 billion anytime soon. So essentially it's simple, people hate Uber because of the narcissistic execs at the company. I'm sure no one hates normal employees.
Also, I used to be a heavy Uber user but then I started taking public transportation and now I take maybe one Uber a month when I go out for night of drinking.
- Left & Right are just political construct which changes all the time. So stop with this stupid Left hates things. People need to be able to make a liveable wage whatever job you do. No one is privileged. Your success didn't came overnight out of no where, a shit ton of people work their ass of to get general things going. All of them deserve to be fairly compensated be it a Uber driver or a Janitor or a farm fruit picker.
This socialist argument of dysfunctional state is utter Bullshit. The things you listed is given to everyone in Sweden, but hey they have a thriving economy as well as a thriving tech sector.Sep 14 7
- Instructure OUtj13How’s fair working conditions a left/right issue? Or health care?
Idk in my travels across the world. Places like Europe have the US beat in most metrics. I find the people who have a lot to say are operating off of articles and not the personal experience of living in “socialistic states”Sep 14 6
- New / Data AEbX28I entirely agree with this.
Look at it simply; the time it takes for a ride, the milage, and the uplift that the company has on the final cost. Let's say you have a 10 mile ride, by Fed Regs, that's about $5. Average speedlimit on city streets is about 35mph, so between 17 and 18 minutes, go with about $4.30 then. So $9.30 before uplift from the company for overhead/profit. From the construction industry, that woild be about $0.93 for overhead, and about $2.60 for profit. About $13.03 total. Reasonable.
It's when companies start trying to mark up their OH/Profit to levels about 50% of what they are producing, where trouble happens and the hate begins.
Flagged by the community.
- New / Eng QrRu77moreFuck uber, lyft, and every piece of shit company that treats their workforce like disposables.
- Piece of unethical shit company Uber killed a woman while illegally testing a self-driving car on public roads. Just a reminder. Virtually zero driver vetting, multiple assaults by drivers. Just saying.
I haven't given them $1. Lyft all the way.
- I watched the video and as a driver with decades of experience I KNOW I would have at least slowed down. Maybe maneuvered. It's a friggin dark road, I would have been on my toes, not watching my phone. And here's the video
Uber dashcam footage shows lead up to fatal self-driving crash - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RASBcc4yOOo
- LinkedIn griI would love ride share to succeed. And also I agree that drivers are not necessarily employees. But Uber and Lyft are also not fully fair:
1) They don’t pay (or didn’t pay before) certain taxes which taxi companies paid.
2) if they claim they are a platform, then their commission (20% or 25%) per ride should be off a base price, not off the surge price as well. Say on Christmas there is an extra demand for Uber drivers, not for the platform.
3) if the drivers are independent contractors or that they are also the customers as the companies claim, then the drivers should be able to set the price and also know the destination when the rider requests a ride. But currently Uber sets the price and the ride is assigned to the driver like a task being assigned to an employee at work.
So after all it is a clean behavior from Uber and Lyft as well.
And I think govt should have regulated these stuff, not go populist
- Pinterest ummmfhcbMy friend interviewed for Lyft. He’s allergic to dogs. Some people can die from indoor dog allergies (asthma attack). After getting the offer, they told him to just take meds or not join. I heard of other really messed up things they’ve done.
It’s pretty fucked up to discriminate a person over dogs and treat him lower than that. Shame on the employees who support their fucked up work environment.
Edit: this is not about service dogs. I consider this fucked up because society has agreed that we do not discriminate on race, gender, religion, disability, etc. When you can cause an asthma attack, that person is legally disabled as you probably would consider yourself disabled by not being able to breath. A dog at work policy is fucked because it’s discrimination and harm. If you support equal opportunity, why would you support a practice that prevents people from working at a place when it’s not based in qualifications but a biological trait? Now a person below calls it culture or lifestyle but how is this different from supporting discrimination on women or a person of a certain color...except you can kill the person too...
- The question is where the line should be drawn. That is what has us wrapped around the axle.
2nd hand smoke is a workplace safety thing. Arguably dogs and asthmatics with allergies are too... and not allowing dogs for people with PTSD (I know some keep pointing out this is not about service dogs but they are just as allergy causing, so that is not relevant) . Arguably strobe lights are another for epileptics or migraine sufferers. The list goes on. It is a judgement call of how much a company should bend to accommodate an employee. That is why “reasonable accommodations” is sometimes decided in a court by a judge, of which none of us are.
- Google ktmb15Seriously, you’re talking like uber is brainwashing riders to use the app and drivers to drive people. It’s a marketplace that connects people who have needs: either paying for their life or to go to places to meet people.
- Well, I know 1 thing, nobody would work if they are not happy unless they can't find a job.
In both cases -
1. They can't find job - Uber/Lyft are savior.
2. Uber drivers working much & are compensated enough. In this case also Uber is good. At least in SF, I have heard some drivers tell me they make 8-9k a month. Let's be honest here, that's a lot for just driving a car without any degree.
I would be more angry on Uber if they earn billions and don't pay well. Company is losing billions & consumers and drivers both are happy.Sep 11 4
- New batorTwo cents here: Uber has a terrible brand reputation both in how it treats employees (women) and customers (women) thanks to shitty leadership. That’s not to say people won’t use it but I am too afraid to invest - what other shoe will drop? Even if there has been turn over in the source of issues they need way better brand management because it still seems like heads are up asses in management. Who would ever invest in a company that seems like an episode of Mad Men? For anyone who says it’s not like that - reputation is reality, not truth. Lyft I’ll use. Often.
- i think Lyft is just as bad. they’ve just used uber being terrible to market themselves as more woke. however even a tiny amount of investigation shows they are all shitty. After years of believing Lyft’s bullshit, I opened my eyes (good friend who worked at Lyft convinced me their culture was toxic). I switched to uber. why? They at least acknowledge they fucked up and need to get better
- Yea, you’re kidding yourself if you think if using Lyft is somehow more righteous or more ethical or something. They are guilty of the exact same crap and guilty of lobbying to avoid the exact same regs. Also look at stats on sexual assaults recently, Lyft is killing it there. They spend so much on this BS marketing around being the more ethical alternative that they’ve forgotten that rides actually need to be safe.
- Ethical alternative my ass: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/04/tech/lyft-sexual-assault-lawsuit/index.html