
Uber's head of communications is leaving the company - mfrommil
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/uber-head-of-comms-rachel-whetstone-is-leaving-the-company/
======
ejlangev
People definitely want to watch Uber burn as some have forever, but something
seems to have shifted. I've been seeing facebook ads for Uber engineering for
the last 1-2 years but recently looking at the comments on them they're 100%
negative. A sampling:

"This is one of those times when steering into the skid might have been the
wrong move."

"I think Uber needs to post an ad for a new President more than a Senior
Software Engineer..."

"How about UberEatsDicks? Can we work on that product together? It sounds
pretty good for you guys. Right up your alley."

"Facebook must hate me to suggest this post. LOL"

"Haha, no thanks. [http://www.theverge.com/.../14664474/uber-sexism-
allegations](http://www.theverge.com/.../14664474/uber-sexism-allegations) ."

~~~
lefstathiou
I think the people who wake up every day trolling / hating Uber are not the
people riding it. I also sense people are getting increasingly immune to the
negative PR because it is becoming clear that someone in media has an axe to
grind.

Living in NYC, I've been asking friends and friends of friends (it makes for
good social fodder) about whether or not they plan to change and I have yet to
hear anyone who actually cares and has changed their behavior (ie shifted to
cabs or lyft). Not a statistically significant sample size but NYC is as
liberal as it gets when it comes to issues like these.

~~~
kbos87
Really? I've talked to multiple Lyft drivers who've told me they recently
switched over to Lyft because they've noticed the volume of fares go down
driving for Uber.

Also, anecdotally, I can say that in my group of friends a lot of people have
switched.

~~~
taysic
Anecdotally I just switched. The fares were always the tiniest bit cheaper at
Uber. Recently it was the sexual harassment + the video of Travis yelling at a
driver that made me switch.

~~~
fatal510
> Travis yelling at a driver

implies that he was somehow being unjustly rude to someone just because he is
an asshole. They had a heated discussion. That is all.

~~~
tomlock
A heated discussion?

>You know what. Some people don’t like to take responsibility for their own
shit. They blame everything in their life on someone else. Good luck!

~~~
aedron
I actually don't think it was so bad, in fact I kind of credit Kalanick on
engaging with the driver, he could have just asked him to STFU and drive.

The worst part about that situation is that the driver made an excellent
point: "You have the business model in your hands, but you chose to buy
everybody a free ride!"

~~~
foldr
>in fact I kind of credit Kalanick on engaging with the driver, he could have
just asked him to STFU and drive.

We're giving people credit for a minimum of human decency now? I'm worried
that we're edging back toward the feudal system. You're talking about
relations between serfs and their liege lords here, not between people in a
free society.

------
dpflan
This is basically a wrapper around a more informative / contextual article
from Recode about the same issue:

[https://www.recode.net/2017/4/11/15265176/uber-
communication...](https://www.recode.net/2017/4/11/15265176/uber-
communications-head-rachel-whetstone-departs)

It's linked to within the TC articles...

------
chejazi
I love how this was upvoted #1 in 11 minutes with no comments. Clearly many
people just want to watch uber burn.

~~~
HenryBemis
I have a mother and a sister and a wife and a daughter. OF COURSE I want
companies like Uber to burn when sexual harassment is a standard practice and
"bosses" either look the other way or chip in.

~~~
macspoofing
Standard practice? That's a big claim substantiated by nothing. Uber has
thousands of employees, the ancedontal account that came out looked credible
but there's nothing that says it is pervasive. Does Uber even skew from the
mean when it comes to harrassment compared to other tech companies or
companies in general?

It looks to me that people are piling on, just because.

~~~
mustacheemperor
>the ancedontal account that came out looked credible but there's nothing that
says it is pervasive

Other than the fact that corporate HR "investigated" the literal screenshots
of Susan being sexually propositioned by her supervisor the day she joined the
company and determined there was nothing wrong, right? I sure fucking hope
that skews form the mean when it comes to harassment.

Your words are chosen so carefully. "Anecdotal...looked credible..." The same
words I'm sure HR had in their oops-we-got-caught presentation for Travis.

~~~
macspoofing
>Your words are chosen so carefully

If they look carefully chosen it's because I'm trying to keep an objective
perspective on this. Susan's account looks credible, and as far as I can tell
Uber messed up, but how do you extrapolate that to a systemic problem?

This whole thing looks like a typical internet pile-up. Uber screwed up in a
specific instance, and now everybody wants to take a free hit.

>I sure fucking hope that skews form the mean when it comes to harassment.

Well does it? Out of the countless shrill blog posts and news articles on
this, did anybody investigate if this is really a systemic problem at Uber?

~~~
neokrish
A systemic problem - Yes. A frequent problem - Maybe.

Let's be clear on what a systemic problem is. The organization has many levels
of controls, with employees in different departments to independently ensure
that as the organization functions and moves forward, it is doing so in the
right way. In this case, the HR, the Line Managers and others have individual
responsibilities to ensure that sexual harassment is not tolerated. But each
of these controls failed. Worse, it seems like they collaborated to undermine
this. This is a systemic problem, as many parts of the system are functioning
incorrectly. Now, is this a frequent problem or one off? Usually, systemic
problems are frequent as there is reason to believe these controls will be
violated / broken again.

~~~
macspoofing
>In this case, the HR, the Line Managers and others have individual
responsibilities to ensure that sexual harassment is not tolerated.

And at the end of it all, you're still just using a sample of one to justify a
conclusion. Not only a sample one, but biased sample of one giving one side of
the story. Again, she seems very credible, but because you weren't there, and
you don't know the full-story you really have to refrain from asserting strong
conclusions.

What is happening here looks like typical behaviour of an internet mob on a
righteous crusade and it makes me uncomfortable, because I've seen this
countless times. Inevitably real people end up getting hurt because you want
to virtue signal to others and take some cheap shots..

------
lukasb
Since the head of communications is definitely to blame for all the negative
press recently, I think this is a great move that shows Uber is committed to
fixing its problems. Really impressed by Travis Kalanick's bold leadership
here and I predict smooth sailing from here on out.

~~~
azernik
... sarcasm? I think?

Regardless, this sounds like quitting rather than being fired.

------
CalChris
It seems that Google, rightfully in my opinion, wants Uber to burn as well.

 _Alphabet wants its lawsuit against Uber to play out publicly_

[https://www.recode.net/2017/4/11/15254028/alphabet-
oppositio...](https://www.recode.net/2017/4/11/15254028/alphabet-opposition-
uber-arbitration)

Between Google investing $258M in Uber and then getting their IP ripped off by
an ex-employee (now at Uber) whose company Google had bought, Levandowski and
Uber pissed off the wrong deep pocketed company.

~~~
nebabyte
> “Anthony Levandowski is not a defendant in this case. Nor is this an
> employment dispute between Waymo and Mr. Levandowski,” reads the opposition.
> “Uber is the defendant in this case, and Uber is responsible for its own
> misconduct.”

Wait, so... They're implying that Levandowski didn't violate his agreement,
but that Uber _is_ liable for using trade secrets...?

Unless those files were marked as theirs (which you'd think Levandowski would
have scrubbed if he made them part of Otto's docs), I can't see how that'd be
a winning strategy for them. hmm

Disclaimer: I don't know anything about the case and am not a lawyer

~~~
azernik
No. There are _two_ disputes - Levandowski wrongfully took the documents
(which Google may or may not pursue - I don't know what's happening there),
_and_ Uber wrongfully used them. They're saying that the arbitration agreement
only applies to the dispute Google has with Levandowski directly, not to the
separate dispute they have with Uber.

------
adpirz
Is there any type of publicly available market research that shows if any of
this Uber press is having an effect on its ridership?

~~~
peatmoss
Ridership is pretty closely guarded. Don't expect Uber to willingly release
anything that could even be used to infer what ridership might be.

~~~
HenryBemis
If they go public, they will HAVE to release their financial statements
(audited & signed off) and then we will be learning what is what.

~~~
tpinckard
'IF' \-
[https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Laconic_phrase](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Laconic_phrase)

~~~
azernik
Protip - if you add "this is a laconic phrase" to the end of a laconic phrase,
it ceases to _be_ a laconic phrase.

------
Akujin
Ya'll are seriously over estimating the influence hacker news has on regular
people. Uber unfortunately still has brand recognition and home field
advantage. Most people have no idea about the sexual harassment issues and for
now their bottom line is hardly taking a hit. Here in Philly people are still
using Uber for the most part.

~~~
dahart
> Uber unfortunately still has brand recognition and home field advantage.

I'm in the middle of a two week trip in San Francisco staying with people who
live here. Out of about a dozen people who've called rides for themselves or
the group while I've been around, 100% were Lyft. Out of all the ridesharing
vehicles I've seen in the city, less than one in five had Uber logos, and
maybe less than one in ten. No drivers we talked to complained about Uber,
some were even very complimentary, but I get the feeling the tide has
completely turned in the Bay Area and there's no home field advantage at home.

And FWIW, everyone I know is aware of the Uber issue, while almost none read
Hacker News. This story is definitely not primarily fueled by HN at this
point, if it ever was.

------
nullnilvoid
Uber just cannot catch a break. The brain drain is just the beginning. I am
waiting to see how Waymo lawsuit pans out.

~~~
dpark
Uber has caught a million breaks. They just keep willfully screwing up.

------
hashmymustache
Nothing seems to elicit more emotional vitriol than a piece about Uber these
days. Not sure exactly what is going on.

------
roystonvassey
I love the idea of Uber and what it did to urban commuting, around the world
and especially where I live (South India, where private transport for hire was
monopolised by auto-rickshaws).

But, I definitely think the execution could've been a lot better. Sure, be
aggressive with pricing, influencing public policy and marketing but to
persist with it and taking it beyond subtlety is a silly, distracting move. By
going the other extreme in curbing monopolies, they have alienated hard-
working drivers who are feeling the heat now. Drivers tell me they work longer
hours for lower payouts. Many of them are unable to make enough to pay back
loans taken out to purchase their cars.

I'm not sure if this was due to demands imposed by investors on aggressive
expansion and growth or if it's something that Uber consciously chose to do.
Either way, I fear the worst and that this will be an another short-lived
experiment.

------
amaks
I'd guess there is too much shit storm at Uber for their PR head to handle.

------
beedogs
I'd get off the Titanic, too, before it sank.

------
HenryBemis
The resistance to change and make things right is sooooo big that all else
will quit except the ones who have the real power to make that change.. while
pushing all others overboard.

Even United CEO apologized, but sexual harassment is no biggie I guess for
Uber.

Good luck Uber.

~~~
apengwin
United's CEO didn't apologize

[http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/10/united-ceo-passenger-
disrupti...](http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/10/united-ceo-passenger-disruptive-
belligerent.html)

~~~
FabHK
He shouldn't have apologised (the immature belligerent dude on the plane
should). However, he has apologised now, bowing to the relentless social media
pressure, which appears to come mostly from people that don't know much about
aviation law, airline operation, or anything related to this incident, from
what I can see.

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/united-airlines-ceo-
apol...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/united-airlines-ceo-apology-
us_us_58ed299ce4b0c89f9122368e)

~~~
joshuamorton
I'm curious: what makes you believe that the man was "immature" and
"belligerent"? Eyewitness accounts and videos seem to imply that he was not,
and as more facts have come out, I'm becoming more and more convinced that
what United did may was a violation of their own policies, and perhaps the
law.

~~~
FabHK
1\. Thanks for engaging, rather than down voting.

2\. It is, indeed, hard to judge without having established the facts. But
resisting a captain's (or, by extension, flight crew's) order, or the orders
of the owner of the airplane, is in itself illegal and, frankly, immature.
Running onto the plane again after having been "dragged off" and muttering
"Just kill me" seems to point to possible mental issues, but again, it's hard
to tell without further information.

More measured pieces, such as this one [1], state "It appears from the
evidence that the law was broken – by him, not by the airline."

[1] [http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-
advice/united-a...](http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-
advice/united-airlines-flight-3411-video-overbooking-chicago-louisville-
security-passenger-denied-boarding-a7677601.html)

~~~
joshuamorton
So, I'm a nonexpert, not going to source this, and am repeating hearsay. Salt
this comment to taste, but:

While I won't dispute that the moment he refused to deplane, he violated the
law (you're required to follow the instructions of flight crew), the request
that he be removed was also a violation of UA policy from what I've seen.

Here's some things that I've read

\- He had previously volunteered to deboard, until he learned that it would be
such a long delay

\- This was not a case of overbooking, the 4 people added to the flight were
United Employees, not overbooked passengers.

\- UA policy states that airline employees will be the first people bumped
from a flight in the case that it is overbooked

\- (According to someone on reddit, so extra salt:) All of the overbooking
regulations have to do with seat assignments. You shouldn't get bumped once
you're assigned a seat, much less seated, and doing so may be a breach of
regulations by United.

If that's the case, then the crew were absolutely breaching UA policy when he
was removed, and they may have been breaching federal regulations when they
asked him to deplane. To be clear, that's no excuse for refusing to deplane
(even if he knew he was in the right), but it's not as simple as "he was
disruptive" if the request for him to leave was illegal.

~~~
FabHK
Good points. Hadn't heard half of them.

As for the 4 employees - there is staff travel for personal reasons (ID
travel, interline discount, heavily discounted, stand-by), where you have
lower priority than paying pax. There is booked staff travel, where you have
intermediate priority. But then there is travel for operational reasons
(positioning), where you have higher priority, because if you don't get there,
a whole planeload of pax (and more, due to knock-on effects) won't fly. So,
the number of available seats was reduced, and insofar it was overbooking.

And certainly all this should have been sorted out before boarding, no doubt,
and normally is. (Apparently only 6 in 100,000 pax or so are IDB, by the way.)

But imagine a seatbelt turns out to be broken, or the wind is so strong that
they have to load more fuel and reduce weight, or whatever. Then there's a
seat less, for operational reasons, and someone has to leave, even if they had
boarded already.

