
In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares - coloneltcb
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-28/in-video-uber-ceo-argues-with-driver-over-falling-fares
======
seertaak
This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I actually thought the driver
was exceedingly rude. He clearly took advantage of Kalanick being in the
public eye, and thus a "target". Filming him without acknowledging it was
totally immoral, it should reduce any fair person's bayesian priors as to the
credibility of the driver.

I'm no fan of Kalanick, but I thought he comported himself reasonably, taking
the time to explain things from his perspective. He could have just said:
"sorry no time". Instead he shook the driver's hand, tried to explain the
logic of his moving down the luxury scale.

The fact that the footage of him with two women wasn't cut out is frankly
disgusting and a total invasion of his privacy. He didn't do anything wrong
except flirt a bit. How tawdry of Bloomberg to show that material.

What is wrong with newspapers nowadays? It seems the press decides someone's
"fair game" and they just engage in the most blatant character assassination.

~~~
timthelion
> Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral,

To me this is a very classist oppinion. Normal people are filmed as they take
the bus, ride the subway, go on the elevator, walk through the graveyard
(seriously), go shopping, so why should a rich person who can afford a cab be
granted an exclusive right to privacy which the rest of us don't have? If we
promote this case due to the expectation of privacy that only serves to create
this devide between rich and poor in which only the rich can afford privacy
rather than a precident in which everyone deserves it.

~~~
Cookingboy
"Normal people are filmed as they take the bus, ride the subway, go on the
elevator, walk through the graveyard (seriously), go shopping, so why should a
rich person who can afford a cab be granted an exclusive right to privacy
which the rest of us don't have?"

What are you talking about? Normal, non-rich people totally have the same
expectation of privacy when they take a cab. Would YOU be ok if your cab
driver films you without any knowledge? A taxi/uber/lyft is a rented private
car, it is not the same as public transportation.

~~~
rhizome
_Would YOU be ok if your cab driver films you without any knowledge?_

Most taxis I've been in the past, oh, let's say 15 years, have had
interior/passenger cams.

~~~
dnautics
usually they have signs that say so. It's illegal to not notify your passenger
that they are being filmed. It's possible that this driver had signs (but no
way to know from just the video).

~~~
crgt
Are you sure this is the case in all states? My understanding is that some
states are 1-party consent, tho IANAL.

Edit: This seems to back up my understanding that most states are 1-party
consent. [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-
co...](http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-
conversations)

------
frgtpsswrdlame
To me this illustrates one of the biggest problems we have in america which is
the crazy firewall between rich and poor. Kamel wanted to have a serious
discussion with Kalanick about how his decisions as CEO were affecting Kamel's
life and Kalanick gets upset about this. That's your job! At least it should
be. If you can't even handle light criticism from the people you employ, you
shouldn't be at the top.

~~~
MegaButts
> If you can't even handle light criticism from the people you employ, you
> shouldn't be at the top.

I ask this in all seriousness: what qualities make for a good leader assuming
the ideals of capitalism? I understand many people here will say they would
prefer to work for a moral leader who can handle criticism and adapt to make
sure his employees are taken care of, but do those leaders perform better at
growing companies quickly? I guess what I'm asking is for data - are assholes
more likely to be successful CEOs? Or maybe they're better at the early stages
when growing a company, or perhaps they're better at the later stages when a
company needs to deal with regulations, or maybe they're always the worst.
What data is there for this apart from anecdotes?

~~~
harigov
Turning that question around, what sort of a leader do you want to work for?
Or folks usually like to work for? This whole idea of growing a company as the
only (or most important) thing that matters is something that should die. We
want people who we genuinely respect and imitate as our leaders. We want to
build products that are genuinely useful and bring about a positive change in
the society.

~~~
MegaButts
Yes, that's a personal decision in deciding where to work. But it's easy to
come up with specific examples of CEOs that are assholes who grow gigantic
companies. I was just using this specific example with Kalanick to raise the
question. Perhaps a better example is Steve Jobs, someone who had something of
a cult following but from what I've heard was an all around terrible person.
If these people truly weren't tolerated, they wouldn't get to the top in the
first place.

~~~
arthur_pryor
right. i think the point is, we should tolerate them less, so that they get to
the top less.

~~~
MegaButts
I'm not asking what we should do from a moral perspective, which is highly
subjective. I'm asking for data. Has anyone done an analysis on the traits of
successful CEOs?

------
erdojo
I believe the driver was itching for a confrontation (he stopped Kalanick as
he was getting out of the car to start the conversation).

It was only after being berated for a minute or two and interrupted that
Kalanick's composure started to crack. Before then, I don't think anything
Kalanick could have said would have mollified this driver. He had an axe and
he was going to grind it. Kalanick could have handled it better, but he didn't
totally melt down either.

And I think the guy is pretty terrible in general.

~~~
frgtpsswrdlame
Where else should he grind it? Kalanick is the CEO. He made a decision which
affects this mans livelihood. Kalanick certainly gets paid enough to face up
to people like this. And if he wants to stop facing up to it, maybe he can do
something about their pay.

~~~
1_2__3
> He made a decision which affects this mans livelihood.

You don't get to challenge everyone in your life who makes decisions that
directly or indirectly affect you.

~~~
placeybordeaux
It's not like he had a right to challenge him, he had an opportunity, which he
took.

------
rockarage
Travis is right on a technicality they did not lower Uber Black prices much if
any. What they did instead was coerced Uber Black drivers to take Uber X
request. Yes drivers can reject Uber X request, but if you reject a certain
amount of Uber rides, they kick you off their system. Probably why the driver
is complaining about going bankrupt, you need a luxury car to drive Uber
Black, but if you're stuck picking Uber X fares you'll lose money.

~~~
xapata
> reject Uber rides ... kick off the system

I believe it simply sets you to inactive temporarily, because you're obviously
not picking up rides and you're slowing down the rider matching process.

~~~
st3v3r
Which is absolutely wrong. They're deciding, as a contractor, to not take jobs
which are not worth their time. As a contractor, they're supposed to be able
to do that without punishment. If Uber is doing this, it is a punishment.

~~~
xapata
> punishment

There's some balance between punishment and keeping the rider experience
pleasant. I don't want to wait 10 minutes to get matched because of nearby
lurking Uber Black cars passing on my Uber X request.

If a driver ignores several requests in a row, they're clearly taking a break.
It's a feature, not a punishment.

~~~
prostoalex
> don't want to wait 10 minutes to get matched because of nearby lurking Uber
> Black cars passing on my Uber X request.

Uber has a solution in place to deal with this, and it's surge pricing.

~~~
xapata
I wonder if surge is activated by a lack of drivers or a lack of drivers who
accept rides. My initial thought was that it was based on the number of active
drivers, so making a driver inactive would take the pricing higher for the
remaining drivers.

------
stagbeetle
This seems like a slam piece following the #DeleteUber bandwagon.

1). The title doesn't match the contents. Instead of reporting on the
specifics of the fare changes, Newcomer rehashes the more prominent Uber
scandals and some short commentary on TK's "short temper."

2). A _very_ short paragraph (around 1/20th the article) breifly elaborates on
the fares:

> _And the gig has gotten harder for longtime drivers. In 2012, Uber Black
> cost riders $4.90 per mile and $1.25 per minute in San Francisco, according
> to an old version of Uber 's website. Today, Uber charges $3.75 per mile and
> $0.65 per minute. Black car drivers get paid less and their business faces
> far more competition from other Uber services._

3). The video transcription selectively takes out parts and fudges others:

> _" Kalanick begins to lose his temper."_

> _Omitting the civil conversation preceding "But people are not trusting you
> anymore"_

The following is just my personal anecdote: I have an immigrant in my family
who's just like the driver. He's not interested in "fighting over a good idea,
which sometimes means admitting that his isn’t the best one," but looking to
assert his ideas onto anyone who takes his argument-bait.

Additionally, it's plain rude to engage in this sort of thing with a stranger.

~~~
idiot_stick
> _I have an immigrant in my family who 's just like the driver. He's not
> interested in "fighting over a good idea_

You may want to rephrase that, because it sounds an awful lot like you're
attributing "stubbornness" to the fact that this guy's an immigrant.

> _Additionally, it 's plain rude to engage in this sort of thing with a
> stranger._

He's not a stranger. He's the boss.

~~~
stagbeetle
> _You may want to rephrase that, because it sounds an awful lot like you 're
> attributing "stubbornness" to the fact that this guy's an immigrant._

I am. This sort of behavior is common among older people from the country my
family member -- _and I_ \-- emigrated from.

> _He 's not a stranger. He's the boss._

That's a bit of an exaggeration. Travis isn't directly overseeing this
specific driver's operations (ignoring the whole "Uber is a contractor not an
employer").

~~~
placeybordeaux
Travis is the CEO that is responsible for the flow of money into the driver's
paycheck.

~~~
stagbeetle
So is Jamie Dimon if I'm a janitor at JPMorgan Chase.

But he isn't my boss.

~~~
dtparr
Interesting. I would say he's not be your immediate supervisor, but he's
definitely your boss.

------
shruubi
Honestly, as much as I don't like Kalanick and would love a reason to dislike
him even more, to some degree I have to side with him on this situation.

The footage with the girls, while incredibly awkward, is nothing more than a
flirtatious conversation. Now, fair enough that the driver realises he has the
CEO of Uber in his car and wants to talk about his situation as a driver, and
I give props to Kalanick for actually taking the time to listen and explain.

Did the ending clip not paint Kalanick in the best light? Sure, but keep in
mind that in this situation he is a guy in his private life who has been
blindsided and accused of ruining this guys life, with, what it seems like
from other posts here, lies.

If telling the guy he needs to take responsibility for his own choices instead
of looking to blame someone else is the worst thing that Kalanick could say to
anyone, then there really isn't a story here from my point of view.

Also, Bloomberg should really take a good hard look at themselves for posting
that video without cutting out the conversation with the women. Posting that
section of the video is the kind of disgusting shit that TMZ and other gossip
rags would pull.

~~~
jzl
_> Sure, but keep in mind that in this situation he is a guy in his private
life who has been blindsided and accused of ruining this guys life, with, what
it seems like from other posts here, lies._

Oh come on, he's the CEO of Uber and he took an Uber. Probably every single
Uber driver in the country if not the world knows who he is. If he doesn't
have an expectation of being recognized and asked about the business he should
hire non-Uber private cars. This isn't someone tracking him down on the street
and sticking a mic in his face. It's completely fair game.

~~~
jimmywanger
> Oh come on, he's the CEO of Uber and he took an Uber.

And if he took a Lyft, a private limo, or drove himself, that would be even
worse publicity. Right now no matter what he does he'll get people sniping at
him, just like on this board. It's a herd mentality where you pick on
perceived weakness, and it's always ugly.

> Probably every single Uber driver in the country if not the world knows who
> he is.

Does every single McDonald's worker in the world know what the CEO looks like?

~~~
jzl
_> And if he took a Lyft, a private limo, or drove himself, that would be even
worse publicity. Right now no matter what he does he'll get people sniping at
him, just like on this board. It's a herd mentality where you pick on
perceived weakness, and it's always ugly._

I'm not saying he shouldn't take Ubers. I'm responding to the comment "he is a
guy in his private life who has been blindsided". He should have every
expectation that any driver he gets might ask him about the business, even
harshly. It's completely fair game. It's his job to deal with it without
losing his cool.

 _> Does every single McDonald's worker in the world know what the CEO looks
like?_

The cult of personality around Kalanick is huge, and he is making daily
decisions in a volatile industry that directly affect the lives of tens if not
hundreds of thousands of drivers. They are very likely to be following his
every move in the news. In any case it doesn't matter how many drivers
recognize him, all I'm saying is that he should have no expectation of privacy
if he takes an Uber. Drivers are very likely to recognize him and should have
every right to ask him tough questions.

~~~
jimmywanger
> He should have every expectation that any driver he gets might ask him about
> the business,

I don't think he's in the public eye that way. The courts take a very specific
view on who is or is not in the public eye. Also, he did engage with the
driver until the driver got belligerent. Should he have just brushed off the
driver with "I don't talk business during off hours?" The driver was not
letting this go.

> The cult of personality around Kalanick is huge

Citation needed. I couldn't pick him out of a lineup, and I use uber daily,
just like I couldn't pick the CEO of ATT out of a lineup.

Basically, the driver was behaving unprofessionally. If you were a limo driver
or a waiter at a nicer restaurant, you get fired if you acknowledge the
customer's status or fame at all. That sort of thing is not done and horribly
intrusive.

------
ProfessorLayton
I hope that at the end of all this, we as a society realize that we need to
actually enforce, as well as update the rules we set regarding employment.
We're effectively subsidizing companies that find loopholes, or simply ignore
laws.

\- Contractor-not-a-contractor employment merely pushes costs and risks on to
the worker. We all end up paying for the worker's social safety net, and costs
of doing business (Such as insurance premiums, for example).

\- Not Uber-specific, but technically-not-full-time employment that just
barely allows employers to bypass benefits owed to full-time employees needs
to be fixed. See Walmart and how they help employees sign up for government
benefits as part of their on boarding in some areas.

In the end, somebody is paying for these costs. Why shouldn't it be the
companies doing business?

Interesting how it ends with "Some people don't like to take responsibility
for their own actions"

~~~
nradov
We all _should_ pay for the worker's social safety net. That shouldn't be
dependant on a worker's employer, or even employment status. In the US, tying
health insurance to employers was one of the worst public policy mistakes we
ever made.

~~~
harryh
Not only is it tied to employers, it's subsidized! If a company gives you $1
in salary you pay taxes on that dollar. If it gives you $1 of health insurance
it's tax free. It's madness.

~~~
thaumasiotes
It's tied to employers _because_ it's subsidized if you get it that way.
That's the whole tie.

~~~
harryh
The subsidy is important, but being in a risk pool is also very important.

------
noobermin
Watching as someone who already doesn't like Kalanick due to recent news, but
at first, I didn't really take sides. The driver engaged first, and his tone
was a little more tensive than Kalanick's. Moreover, Kalanick's argument seems
sensible[0] regarding why he might have had to lower rates.

However, once Kalanick's retort essentially becomes "you're not taking
personal responsibility and blaming others (ie., me)" he loses me. It's a fair
discussion up till that point and each party's argument is reasonable (even if
the tone isn't polite). What does Kalanick know about the driver's situation
that he can say that?

When taken along with current news regarding Uber's culture, this doesn't look
very good for Uber and Kalanick as a person.

[0] I'm not judging it based on its merits because I am not in the know
regarding the numbers of the issue.

~~~
pjwal
I don't consider it a fair discussion when the driver falsely insists the fair
is $2.75/mile, when it is $3.75/mile and continues to pound the theme when
Kalanick had already given his explanation. What is the driver expecting? For
Uber to go back and raise fairs on Uber Black?

~~~
moogly
1) He didn't "insist" it was $2.75. He mentioned the figure once. 2) When he
quoted the figure, he said "and it's now what, $2.75?" clearly implying that
he's not entirely sure about the current rate.

~~~
pjwal
It seems like the driver should know these basic facts before he engages on
the matter.

~~~
tkxxx7
What does it matter if he knows the exact amounts? The point (one, of many)
stands that the pay was lowered.

~~~
pjwal
So, it matters that it was lowered but actual amounts are inconsequential? I
reject that.

------
dokein
A bit of a tangential point: last week there was a post here about Facebook
"changing the rules" and a significant number of small businesses disappearing
as a result. Whether or not Uber's black car reimbursement really did change,
it strikes me that drivers probably made business decisions (e.g. car
purchases) based on Uber's initial reimbursement and are now seeing the rules
change and grossing far fewer profits than expected (and prices still have a
ways to go).

One can argue that these small business owners / contractors should have had
the foresight not to do business on someone else's platform, but this strikes
me as a bit Malthusian. Going through bankruptcy is no small price to pay for
this lesson. Hopefully the next Facebook or Uber will have to promise some
degree of stability (the same way I am very wary of working with SaaS
startups), but I'm not optimistic - there's a fool born every minute.

~~~
pjwal
The problem with this is that it ignores the economic realities that went into
the decision of Uber to lower fairs and assumes that their demand would have
remained the same with or without doing it. Drivers would have not been happy
with higher fairs if they couldn't, well...get a fair because of lowered
demand.

------
pfarnsworth
How is this video not illegal, especially in California?

And sure rates went down, but it's still 3X the price of UberX. It didn't go
down precipitously. From $4.90/1.25 to 3.75/0.65 won't cause someone to lose
$97k and probably he got more activity overall. I agree with the CEO that this
guy sounds like he's blaming Uber for his problems, when there are plenty of
UberBlack drivers making hand over fist otherwise the drivers wouldn't be
there. My wife's last UberX driver said he was making $3k/week.

~~~
KirinDave
> How is this video not illegal, especially in California?

You agree to surveillance when you enter the car. Just like a taxi, a bus, a
train or a trolley.

You actually don't have an "expectation of privacy" in these spaces either. So
a drone cam or telephoto lens is okay too. That's where state law is
interesting.

California is actually surprisingly permissive for photographers and
videographers.

~~~
erdojo
Unless Uber has that in its terms of service, that may be open to
interpretation. Even if an Uber is considered a public space, that's not the
sole determining factor in two-party consent cases.

[http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-
law](http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law)

~~~
KirinDave
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Your read is absolutely right.

------
moogly
"You know what? You know what? Some people don't like to take responsibility
for their own shit. They blame every single thing in their life on somebody
else". Less than a minute after having blamed the lowering of prices on his
competitor(s). That delicious irony.

~~~
zazpowered
taking action is different from just blaming and talking

------
CodeWriter23
That's funny Kalanick still thinks he's beaten Lyft. The TNC lot at LAX tells
a much different story.

I've been working it for Lyft since December. The lot has about 170 spaces.
Lyft and Uber can each queue up 100 vehicles so some would have to park on
streets.

Before #deleteuber, I would come in with 90+ drivers ahead of me. I'd have to
wait an hour. I would watch Uber drivers arrive after me and leave before me.
And the lot was always full while the airport had arriving passenger traffic.

Since #deleteuber, it's much different. LAX seems to be in Prime Time much of
the time. But here's the weird thing, the lot is like half empty. There's like
20 cars in the lot that fly only the Uber branding (and plenty flying both
logos on their Uber-leased Priuses). I haven't waited more than 10 minutes to
get dispatched, except at like 2AM when the passenger air traffic tapers off.
On most of my LAX dispatches in the last week, I couldn't even reach a parking
space and park before getting dispatched. And this arriving with sometimes as
low as 50 drivers ahead of me, and typically 80 or more.

The most incredible time, I arrived at LAX. It was Prime Time in the airport.
The app told me the queue was full and to leave. I drove slowly down Jenny
Street, the app flipped to 98 ahead of me. I entered the lot, followed the
traffic jam of Lyft drivers trying to get to the designated parking area. It
took like three minutes. I was dispatched as I entered the parking area. I
took the short cut through the fence to exit the lot and picked up my fare.

But here is the clearest indication to me that Lyft completely owns LAX now. I
arrived, parked, ran to the porta potty and took a leak. 3 Uber drivers were
hanging out near that end of the lot, talking to each other. I got my dispatch
while walking to my car. I picked someone up, took them to Marina Del Ray,
came back, got dispatched again and those same 3 drivers were still killing
time talking to each other.

~~~
prostoalex
Lyft is always cheaper out of LAX for some reason. It's always some small
amount, like 25-30c on a $45 fare, but quite consistent. My rides _to_ LAX are
usually a mishmash of providers, but rides out of LAX, when optimized for
price, tend to be exclusively Lyft.

------
camillomiller
Typical and unfortunate outcome: there is a serious problem with a company's
policies. Suddenly everything slightly controversial coming from that company
is newsworthy. In doing so, the original well-founded and important criticism
is diluted. This is just a more refined form of clickbait.

------
jforman
Travis and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Quarter for PR

~~~
VMG
Maybe they are flushing out the bad stories that are out there?

------
NTDF9
How can a driver lose $97000?

Not asking in support/opposition of uber. Genuinely curious about what are
some ways drivers could get into so much trouble?

~~~
jbob2000
He probably took out a loan to buy a nice car/limo to do Uber Black work.
Since the rates dropped, he probably can't make the monthly payments, let
alone maintenance and gas.

------
envy2
Unfortunately, that driver is about to find out what "two party consent" for
recordings means.

~~~
koolba
Does that apply to being recorded in a public location (and would the driver's
cab count)?

Also, for all we know there could be a sign in the black car that says, "
_Smile you 're on candid camera!_".

~~~
loeg
Inside of a private car with the windows up isn't public.

I don't know whether California is a two-party consent state, and the
specifics of what that requires are different state to state anyway.

~~~
koolba
> Inside of a private car with the windows up isn't public.

If it was your car and someone got in and recorded you, then I'd say that's
more clear cut. But if you get into someone else's car do you have a
reasonable expectation of privacy?

~~~
dkonofalski
Since you're technically hiring that person and their car to provide you a
service, they have to disclose up-front if you're being recorded. In addition,
just because you were being recorded doesn't mean the driver has the right to
publicize the video. That requires additional consent unless it's a matter of
public record.

------
thkim
This is a terrible jab at Uber. I expected Bloomberg for higher journalistic
standard than this.

1\. What does "two female friends" have to do with driver's argument with
Kalanick? Should've cut that out. I read it as slimy ad hominem to reinforce
bias on Uber's culture. Uber might have some culture problem, but it is
completely unrelated with driver's issue.

2\. Does driver's argument have any basis? The piece merely draws attention to
Kalanick and driver's tension - is Bloomberg now a TMZ for business world?

I'm very disappointed in Bloomberg.

------
peternilson
No one seems to be discussing this, but is Travis personally responsible for
the loss of the drivers 97k? The driver sure thinks he is. Perhaps he played
some roll in it. But the driver certainly made the decision to take out that
loan. And I guess the driver had enough sense at the time to understand the
risks involved with credit when he took out the loan. Well then you might say
it's not the most compassionate thing to say to someone who clearly is
suffering from financial loss. But I think it only seems like a mean thing to
say because it's true. And it's really these truths that people don't want to
accept about themselves. That they themselves are responsible for their own
suffering.

------
danielrhodes
I've been reading through these comments and find it quite interesting because
both the driver and Kalanick are correct, but as is usual in these
confrontations, they weren't communicating properly with each other.

On Kalanick's side, he is entirely correct that Uber has to compete in a very
competitive market and most of that competition is in price. If Uber didn't
compete on price, they would sign their own death warrant.

On the driver's side, he took a risk in going for an Uber black car and he
probably wasn't fully aware of that risk. He seems justified in feeling upset
at how exposed he is to market forces that are outside of his control.

Given that, perhaps Uber should better inform drivers of that risk and offer
some way that drivers can buffer themselves from that risk. For example, Uber
could offer drivers some sort of insurance against rate changes. This would
incentivize Uber to be more careful about rate changes since they would pay a
penalty if the delta is too big and it would stabilize the rate for drivers --
there are a lot of variables to play with here to make the outcome mutually
beneficial.

------
stillsut
If DeleteUber succeeds, that's then end of the American dream as we know it.

Starting a tech business with better ideas, and working harder and smarter
than the Old Boys with Money (and taxi medallions) is the one of the last ways
anyone, like a Zuckerberg, can climb the ladder, without selling out their own
hacker spirit as we call it. The fact that the CEO would sit and dish strategy
in a frank manner is something I find commendable, and seems to part of this
guy's nature.

But if Uber goes down in flames for this petty PR play after burning through
billions in VC money to acquire the market share they are rapidly losing, no
young founder, heck no man or woman who hasn't trained in corporate lawyer
dark arts is going to be allowed to run these innovative startups who need
huge amounts of capital to be sunk initially for a long term payout.

Welcome to the world of "cool program! the grownups will take it from here
kiddo."

------
calvinbhai
disclosure: I dont like Uber since 2010. I have always felt Uber has used the
wrong means to achieve its success, and because of that I dislike Travis.
(most of my HN comments about Uber are either neutral or negative). I feel bad
for all those drivers who bit the Uber bait and bought expensive cars, with an
expensive / sub prime loan. But it is the similar entitled attitude that lead
people to hate the cab/taxi drivers/fleets.

With that said, I still think, in this video, the driver was on the wrong side
and Travis was not. In fact, Travis starts replying in a fairly equanimous
way, and loses it only after the driver starts blaming Travis for everything.
If the driver has such a problem with Uber, he should not be driving for it!

------
jbob2000
But was the driver right? Did uber black fares drop?

~~~
inverse_pi
I think what the driver is arguing is that Uber changed its business model
from black car only to including UberX and UberPool which drove the price of a
trip down and less people using black car. I think this is perfectly
reasonable, it's just maybe the way Travis responded was not very nice.

------
brotherjerky
Perhaps they need to hire Sally Yates or John Ashcroft to get to the bottom of
this now?

------
em3rgent0rdr
This is why we need a distributed p2p ridesharing system, like
[http://libretaxi.org/](http://libretaxi.org/)

~~~
lupin_sansei
How does Libre Taxi uniquely identify a driver for ratings and kicking them
off the system if they are too bad?

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
I doesn't yet, but you make a good point that it desperately needs a
reputation system. There are a few feature requests to this effect.

------
sksareen1
Seems like bad reporting: trying to make a mountain out of molehill. It's the
opinion of one driver who happened to get his boss on tape, and had a pretty
productive discussion wherein the driver pushed and became rude, more so than
Travis. The article painted an inaccurate picture of what happened - it's
entirely a non-issue imo.

------
nstj
The article says that the Uber _customer price_ went down for Black ($4.90 to
$3.75 etc) but does anyone have any evidence that the amount paid to drivers
has gone down (given there's a large disconnect between Uber customer prices
and what is paid to drivers).

------
s0me0ne
In this day and age of the NSA, let them record it and put it all over the
internet. I have a dash cam myself, but not for inside the car, although it
does record the audio inside, (which can pick up some outside audio).

------
rebelidealist
1\. Add more chars 2\. Acquire medium or add their on blogging container.
[https://medium.com/@hungrycharles/3-things-twitter-can-do-
to...](https://medium.com/@hungrycharles/3-things-twitter-can-do-to-make-it-
the-most-popular-social-network-c62d0d7695e6#.t87svr6m6)

~~~
umeshunni
Wrong topic? Perhaps you meant to post it here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13746549](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13746549)
?

------
aioprisan
Does Travis have the temperament to lead this company to a public offering?
Given how much baggage he has and how responsible he is for Uber's current
sexist culture, I hope investors give keeping Travis on some thinking.
Responsibility for a terrible culture that shields sexist management starts at
the top.

------
koltaggar
Why is healthcare coverage relevant

------
jannettee
That's some serious manspreading he's got going on there.

~~~
skeletonjelly
The middle seat typically does this due to the axle running down the center

------
rhizome
_Just because someone happens to work for Walmart /Uber/whoever, I don't see
why it means that employer suddenly becomes responsible for meeting any
particular set of needs that person might have._

You would have been the "awful" kind of slaver back in the day.

~~~
dang
Did you really just attack someone the way this comment sounds like you did?
That's dismaying. If I've read it correctly, it's the kind of attack we ban
accounts for, so please don't do that here.

We detached this comment from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13758241](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13758241)
and marked it off-topic.

~~~
rhizome
I thought it was apt. The only problem is that I myself imply that there's a
such thing as a "good" slaver, but to assert that an employer is justified by
their existence and corporate strategy to reduce their employees to chum is
comparably distasteful.

GP's point at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13757973](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13757973),
where they illustrate a few externalized costs, which also seem reasonable to
criticize, received pushback that companies don't have to do nothin' for their
employees but reap the profits, which is a bad position to take, IMO.

People use the term "un-American" too much these days, but the person I was
responding to went way beyond that into anti-civilization.

There is no way that the person I was replying to could possibly be a slaver,
so I wasn't attacking them personally. I was connecting their position to that
of slavers who would just as soon let their slaves die in the fields from
overwork, dehydration, or any number of other things that "shouldn't be the
boss' responsibility."

------
st3v3r
Why is this guy allowed to continue leading a company again?

------
horsecaptin
I smell an expert PR move!

------
grandalf
I always ask the drivers how they like Uber, whether they have considered Lyft
(most use both), etc.

The only group of highly disgruntled drivers are the ones who lived in the
overpriced period of black cars that existed before Uber came into the market.

The driver probably spent $97K on a luxury car expecting to be able to make
the prevailing black car driver wage at the time.

Uber did a great service to consumers by democratizing driving services, and
now money flows to so many other people and does tremendous benefit to
society.

I'm glad Travis stood up for himself. Maybe if that driver had been more
rational and less inclined to gripe about other people's successes causing his
life to be miserable, _he_ might have started Uber. He likely had a big
advantage over Travis in terms of familiarity with the industry and would have
made fewer mistakes early on.

------
falloutx
1\. Uber should really put up a policy against drivers using cockpit cameras
to record passengers. Most of them do it without any consent. I usually give
them 1 star if someone uses cockpit camera.

2\. I have been a big Supporter of Travis Kalanick since last 2-3 years, just
for the fact that he's willing to take harsh steps to win. This ultimately
helps Uber. Uber's Drivers are not its employees, it doesn't want them to
treat them like employees. As more drivers enter the market, supply starts
increasing faster than demand and therefore prices must decrease. Since
Driving is low barrier profession, its relatively easy to replace them and
accumulate them with Uber's model. In this conversation Kalanick is seemingly
busy with friends, therefore much less interested in discussing details of his
decisions.

~~~
AlexandrB
> I usually give them 1 star if someone uses cockpit camera.

Why would you do that? These drivers are just "taking harsh steps" to ensure
their safety and the safety of their property. I thought you were all for
that.

Edit: also why should Uber be allowed to dictate what equipment its "not
employees" can and can't use in their own car?

~~~
falloutx
Drivers are contractors, so Uber can dictate the "terms" for contracts it is
part of. Drivers are in a contract with Uber.

Uber should be trying to protect its costumers from privacy violations, so it
should take steps to ensure drivers are not using anything that would hurt
costumers physically or by any other way. I understand the some of the recent
privacy issues in Uber have come from its employees and not from drivers, so
It should also be trying to get rid of destructive employees as well.

