
Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source - troydavis
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/06/11/business/11reuters-uber-board-ceo.html
======
mathattack
The board can't force him out if he doesn't want to go, can it? (Due to his
special shares) Can the company thrive with someone else running it? And will
it be obvious enough for Travis to see this? (How do you fight all the local
taxi commissions without a combative streak?)

I wonder if this will eventually cause companies to think twice about this
type of governance.

~~~
kunaalarya
They prob cant fire him but they can say that hes a big punching bag right now
and bringing extra negative attention and he needs a break.

~~~
zoomzippity
Zuckerberg didn't need a break and Facebook turned out fine.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165566/Mark-
Zuckerb...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165566/Mark-Zuckerberg-
The-sex-sleaze-secrets-Facebooks-little-emperor.html)

All the company needs is some pressure to shore up some long overdue culture
debt. This is the fastest growing company in history after all. Not every
aspect of the company was going to come out of the over perfectly baked when
you grow that quickly. Uber isn't the first successful startup with this issue
and it won't be the last.

Replacing the leader would be a terrible mistake. I'm not a religious person,
but I do wish more people were familiar with the lesson taught in the parables
of the Lost Son, Lost Sheep or Lost Coin. Redemption is always possible.
Society as a whole would be much better off if we gave more people a chance to
redeem themselves. Not considering people capable of redemption and
considering people deserving of punishment without mercy is the reason we (the
United States) have the disaster that is the largest incarcerated population
in the World.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Prodigal_Son](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Prodigal_Son)

~~~
tim333
I'm not sure the problems at Facebook were in the same league as those at
Uber. See eg. "How true are Katherine Losse's allegations..." on Quora
[https://www.quora.com/How-true-are-Katherine-Losses-
allegati...](https://www.quora.com/How-true-are-Katherine-Losses-allegations-
about-sex-and-sexism-at-Facebook-in-The-Boy-Kings)

~~~
zoomzippity
I don't see any reason why Charlotte Willner's account of what happened at
Facebook couldn't apply just as easily to Uber. What makes you say that things
are not in the same league? Katherine Losses' allegations are as salacious as
anything I've heard about Uber (or many other successful early stage tech
companies for that matter)

    
    
        After five months of examining the company's culture, 
        Uber's new human resources officer, Liane Hornsey 
        concluded that the firm's treatment of women was no 
        worse than what occurs at other companies.
    
        Uber's biggest employee problems are pay and pride, not 
        sexism, says HR boss “Wherever I have worked, I have 
        seen things that are not great for women,” Hornsey said 
        in a USA TODAY interview. “I don’t think it’s about tech, 
        or this city or this company. I think it’s about the 
        world of work, and I think that it’s something that we 
        have to take really super seriously.”
    

source: [https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/06/11/reports-
uber...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/06/11/reports-uber-board-
consider-management-changes/102749198/)

Liane Hornsey was formerly the VP of People Operations at Google for like 5
years I think. I'm far more inclined to believe her account of what things are
like than any journalist lazily trolling for any disgruntled former employee
to recount a story that will generate ad impressions.

------
WisNorCan
Now there is reporting that Chief Business Officer, Emil Michael is out as
well. [1][2] I guess the Holder investigation wasn't as toothless as people
had initially worried.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/emil-michael-uber-chief-
busin...](http://www.businessinsider.com/emil-michael-uber-chief-business-
officer-to-leave-company-report-2017-6?op=1)

[2] [https://www.axios.com/top-uber-exec-emil-michael-to-
resign-2...](https://www.axios.com/top-uber-exec-emil-michael-to-
resign-2439849459.html)

------
furioussloth
Well CEO's mother passed away and father is still in hospital. I feel his
absence is totally normal IMO. Most of Uber news on this board are total click
baits. I agree with many people who feel the anti-Uber lazy reporting is out
of control.

~~~
uhnuhnuhn
You misunderstood. This is not about a current absence of the CEO, this is
about the board debating to potentially force the CEO to take leave of
absence.

------
Animats
The funny thing is that Kalanick may be pushed out over sexual harassment of a
few people. Not for systematically underpaying several hundred thousand
people. Not for creating a financial structure that's about a year from
collapse.

~~~
fullshark
I thought the problem was overpaying several hundred thousand people?

~~~
jo909
Or undercharging several hundred thousand customers? (Not earning enough)

~~~
zoomzippity
Demand would drop if they charged more. This would have the following
potential results:

\- all driver earn more per trip, but may not make more per hour since there
would be fewer trips to accept

\- drivers who see a drop in the number of trips will be earning less or will
have to exit the market if they don't earn enough.

\- only when some drivers choose to exit the market would the remaining
drivers be able to earn more per trip and and accept the same number of rides
per hour.

Any company following Uber's loss leading strategy at the end of the day is
fomenting more liquidity in order to gauge how much more demand there is at a
lower price point. That gives them a profitability target to work towards by
becoming more efficient.

------
dacox
This may not be the place for it, but: what's the deal with Uber not rolling
out in Western Canada? I know the government hates them, but didn't they
launch illegally like...everywhere else?

~~~
tobyjsullivan
Vancouver was one of the first cities they launched in. And one of the first
they got booted out of.

My personal theory is we're actually a crap market for Uber. We'd obviously
love ride sharing but realistically the alternatives (transit, walkability,
car share) are simply quite good. Even our cabs aren't that expensive compared
to other cities where Uber has really caught on. We'd use Uber, just not that
much.

~~~
kintalo
Vancouver is getting Uber back by end of 2017:
[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-
taxi-1.401...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-
taxi-1.4013315)

------
_Codemonkeyism
Hasn't he already put a lot of eggs in that Chinese company?

------
Velin
Well his parents just had an accident, too...

------
dboreham
Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their
incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much
money?

~~~
product50
What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which
had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very
existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives
of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe.

What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs.
just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence?

Also, it is important to understand that his "always hustling" and "being
ruthless" or "never say die" attitude are a double edged sword. The same
attitude has served him very well when taking on local governments to push his
service through - but is creating a number of challenges at running a company
which has now become quite big.

~~~
watwut
I would much rather celebrated people who having choice between gain and
morality choose morality. Uber behavior made it harder for less law breaking
less immoral to succeed for a time.

"Being ruthless" is not double edged sword - it is simply unethical behavior
that gives you advantage. That is all there is to it. More ethical CEOs face
challenges too, pretty much the same challenges.

~~~
noway421
It's not necessarily that Travis acknowledges that he acts immoral. After all,
he was always talking about fighting unjust and greedy taxi companies who are
robbing their customers. Surely he slipped with the whole UberX and driver's
pay going way to low, but that was a necessary measure against Lyft taking up
the untapped market. Would be interesting to hear how he feels about that
whole thing and whether he regrets doing the thing which he essentially had to
do.

In regard to self-driving, Google would have taken the place and drove Uber
out of business if Uber didn't start getting on the same train. In that
regard, there's not much empathy you can hold for drivers as their profession
becomes a thing of the past.

~~~
watwut
> but that was a necessary measure against Lyft taking up the untapped market

> Google would have taken the place and drove Uber out of business

That is exactly what I am talking. "I wanted to win against them" might be an
explanation, but not a freaking excuse. Having choice between getting
advantage and not doing something unethical, Uber consistently chosen
unethical. Feeling bad about those things once you get caught is probably
nicer then not feeling bad, but does not make all that much difference in real
world. How you feel does not changes impact of your actions on other people
nor their morality.

> After all, he was always talking about fighting unjust and greedy taxi
> companies who are robbing their customers.

But somehow when taxi companies are as greedy as him and as unjust as him,
then it is bad. Or rather, this was just populism/propaganda to turn people
against competitors and regulators - to gain advantage for himself.

> In that regard, there's not much empathy you can hold for drivers as their
> profession becomes a thing of the past.

Yeah and Paris taxi driver who cut tires of Uber car did what was necessary to
fight Uber. Sure he essentially did what he had to do and sure since he
certainly feels bad about it after being caught then it is fine.

I mean, if I claim my collegue achievments my own or badmouth him behind back
to make him look less capable and put myself up, then I am just essentially
doing what I have to do, right?

~~~
dismantlethesun
Does all this begin with the premise that law-breaking is by necessity
immoral?

~~~
watwut
No, I don't think that all law-breaking is by necessity immoral. People who
broke the law and printed illegal literature in soviet block are heroes. Or
people who helped runaway slaves. Eduard Snowden broke the law and I find it
perfectly fine. If you don't stop at stop sign on bicycle, I don't find it
particularly immoral.

However, law-breaking in order to get ahead of business competition is far
away from the above categories.

~~~
zoomzippity
Even if they are breaking corrupt laws passed by the lobbyists working for the
incumbents? Regulatory capture is a thing that harms society and Uber has done
more to undo that harm than in this industry than anyone else.

~~~
watwut
If that would be true, they would not push for change in locations where
regulations were sane. If they stood for pure market only, they would not
sabotage competitors. They have their own lobbyist pushing for whatever suits
them.

------
enraged_camel
Wow, this has almost dropped off the front page. I guess the Uber fans are out
in force...

~~~
philovivero
Or maybe people just don't care anymore for NYtimes articles that cite
"source." Fabricated clickbait is real.

------
jeffjose
Travis Kalanick's rise was the result of Silicon Valley's sincere yearning for
an irreverent CEO when Steve Jobs passed away. We were collectively willing to
overlook any blemishes in the young company, which set up for failure in the
long run.

I sometimes wonder if Steve Jobs had still been alive, would he have been
revered as much as he was in the 2010s? His management style would have sooner
or later caused permanent damage to someone you and I personally know. And
that's where we'd have drawn the line.

~~~
golemotron
I think it's important to notice that what you are talking about is a
zeitgeist change. In the time that Jobs was building organizations the
consensus was that work (particularly work by engineers with options) was a
voluntary contract and if you didn't like how you were being treated you moved
to another job.

The flip side to your point that no one articulates today is that some people
with thicker skin like very challenging environments - like a Jobs-ian company
that makes them feel like they are part of a a group of with real intensity
that is changing the world, and Apple surely did.

Where we mess up today is in thinking that there is one right type of work
experience for everyone.: the mythical "we" that you write about in "And
that's where we'd have drawn the line."

Maybe it's better to have many diverse workplace cultures and let people chose
among them based upon their individual wants and temperaments.

~~~
icebraining
_a Jobs-ian company that makes them feel like they are part of a a group of
with real intensity that is changing the world, and Apple surely did._

Yeap, it sure did:

 _We were reluctant to show it to Steve, knowing that he would want to
commandeer it, but he heard about it from someone and demanded to see it. We
showed it to him, and, unfortunately, he loved it. But he also insisted that
Apple owned all the rights to it, even though we had developed it in our spare
time._

 _Steve couldn 't insist that Apple owned all of it, because Bill Budge wasn't
an Apple employee at the time. But Steve could claim complete ownership of the
interface card, which he said was developed with Apple resources. Burrell and
I were pretty upset, because we did it on our own time and thought that we
should be compensated, but it's really hard to argue with Steve, especially
about money._

Can't you just feel the unity of the group? /s

[http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Apple_II_Mouse_Ca...](http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Apple_II_Mouse_Card.txt)

------
kolbe
Sorry to be crass, but fuck this. I hate Travis's attitude as much as anyone,
but no man who has achieved something as great as Uber deserves to go out like
this--at the hands of some board members who rode his coat tail to riches.

Reminds me of Apple marginalizing Steve Jobs. Fuck that. I want to see Travis
face up to his immoral bullshit as much as anyone, but by Lyft pummeling Uber
into the ground, not some cowardly vote from the board.

~~~
twblalock
The board didn't ride his coattails -- the board's money is the reason the
company still exists.

Your argument about "coattails," and your Steve Jobs example, make it seem
like you believe that a company exists for the benefit of its founders. That's
true if the entire company is the founders in a garage making things, but it
all changes once the company takes outside investment -- after that, the
company exists for the benefit of its shareholders.

The board has a right to make sure the company is run well -- they company
gave the board that right in exchange for the board's money. If the CEO is
hurting the company, its investors, and its employees, it is good for the
board to step in and prevent him from doing so, even if he was the founder.

~~~
shostack
Going further, doesn't the board have a legal obligation to do what is best
for the company and shareholders?

