
Uber stopped its own investigators from reporting crimes to the police - CaptainZapp
https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/25/20883619/uber-special-investigations-crimes-police-rape-report-safety
======
mabbo
> “At the end of the day, we’re not the judge and jury to determine whether a
> crime has occurred,” Tracey Breeden, Uber’s global head of women’s safety,
> told the Post. “We’re here to gather information, make a business decision.
> We’re not law enforcement.”

All the more reason to give what you have to the actual law enforcement and
let _them_ determine if a crime has occurred.

They are literally choosing to make more money by allowing crimes to not be
prosecuted. How can anyone who is part of this sleep at night?

~~~
throwaway_law
Don't forget the corporate double-speak:

>“We are very proud of this team’s work and know they approach their jobs with
tremendous compassion and understanding,” the spokesperson said.
“Characterizing this team as anything but providing support to people after a
difficult experience is just wrong."

~~~
muro
A good example how to say nothing in many words.

------
duxup
>The investigators are also allegedly instructed to “first to protect Uber”
and make sure it is “not held liable” for any crimes that are committed by
people using the company’s ride-hailing platform.

This doesn't seem much different than say interacting with HR inside your own
company or anything like that.

Still a bad look and morally questionable, but at the same time I do agree
that the victim can / should go to the police if they wish to.

If Uber did go to the police I wonder what guidelines there would be. Only if
there is a confession? "Enough" evidence? Or just any accusation?

I can imagine a situation where a victim doesn't want to go to the police, and
that is their call. I'm not sure it is Urber's job to do it for them.

~~~
eli
This is a stereotype of HR that IMHO is not representative of the majority of
people in the profession.

~~~
duxup
The majority of people in the profession don't change the incentives. They
work for the company, push comes to shove that is their job.

They might help me figure out some insurance thing here or there and really
care, but when it comes to something important they are there for the company,
not me.

~~~
eli
Doesn't everyone at the company... work for the company? An Engineering
Manager has an incentive to overwork engineers to a hit a deadline -- and,
yes, sometimes that happens! -- but in addition to just being a bad thing to
do, that comes at a huge long term cost to the business. It's much better for
the company and the employees to not overwork them. If HR is doing it right,
supporting the company and supporting its employees are compatible goals.

~~~
falcolas
> supporting the company and supporting its employees are compatible goals.

Until an employee does something that puts themselves at odds with the
company. At which point HR is the tip of the spear when it comes to protecting
the company from that employee. "Here's how to let them go legally." "Here's
how we bribe them into not talking bad about us." "Here's our zero tolerance
policy we can fit our employee firing into."

------
stefan_
Of course not. The team exists specifically to avoid police (and then at one
point, _press_ ) involvement.

It's like sports teams that have their own anti-doping initiatives - not to
catch cheaters, but to catch them before the authorities can and sink you.

------
unpythonic
Not sure why we don't refer to the original reporting from which this was
based:

"When rides go wrong: How Uber’s investigations unit works to limit the
company’s liability"

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/25/ubers-i...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/25/ubers-
investigations-unit-finds-what-went-wrong-rides-its-never-companys-fault/)

~~~
CaptainZapp
Submitter here.

Simple: WP is paywalled.

Generally I agree that it's good practice to submit the original source. In
this case and since the Verge article is pretty concise I thought it's the
better choice.

Mods: Feel free to change the link if you deem it appropriate.

~~~
RankingMember
Non-paywalled version:
[https://outline.com/wd6Y6k](https://outline.com/wd6Y6k)

------
TearsInTheRain
> Uber told the Post that it’s “the victim’s choice to report an incident to
> police,” a position the company tells The Verge it arrived at after
> consulting experts. That said, the company has started giving people the
> “option to allow [Uber] to contact law enforcement on their behalf”

This is a reasonable policy and this sentence completely desensationalizes the
premise of the article

~~~
asperous
Yeah I was just thinking of the opposite.. if Uber recorded all rides and
screened them for felonies. Someone playfully hits someone in the backseat and
Uber calls it in "just in case".

Seems like it should be up to the victim if they want to press charges.

That said I think Uber is trying to avoid the lawsuit regarding "you guys need
to do more to screen your drivers!" Taking more responsibility about their
drivers actions. The lawsuit is bound to happen eventually.

------
beat
I'm watching a case on a personal basis right now. A friend of mine was raped
at gunpoint by an Uber driver, who was stalking her neighborhood looking for
her the next day. And NOLA cops aren't exactly helpful to the poorer residents
there... "911 Is a Joke" indeed.

We'll see what Uber does. The thing is, they own a device that tracks the
driver's movements. They know who he picked up, and where, and if the car
stopped, and where. That's a lot of evidence to hand to police.

------
deogeo
> The special investigations team inside Uber [..] is not allowed to [..] file
> official police reports “even when they get confessions of felonies,”

One step above "snitches get stitches". Are such contracts/instructions even
remotely legal?

Edit: By legal, I don't mean enforceable. Rather, I mean isn't giving such an
instruction itself a criminal act?

------
SilasX
I feel a war of the hiveminds coming on.

"Never ever ever ever talk to police, they're pure evil and there cannot ever
be some conceivable benefit to doing so."

'Why, oh why, didn't Uber report everything to the police?'

People who sympathize with both mentalities, what are your thoughts on
distinguishing the cases here?

~~~
davinic
My position is "never talk to police without an attorney" -(although this
wouldn't apply if I were reporting a crime). Uber has plenty of attorneys
either way. There is no conflict.

------
pininja
> the company has started giving people the “option to allow [Uber] to contact
> law enforcement on their behalf” if the customer is reporting an incident
> that may be a crime, according to the Post.

------
raslah
My next web search will concern corporate psychology, and studies that explore
the mindsets employees within an organization adopt resulting from the
influence of leadership. These mindsets inevitably leak out into society, and
are evident in the defenses offered to the indefensible behavior described in
the article. Of course, there is nothing illegal here in that apparently
customers are allowed the option of reporting the crimes themselves, however
when you consider that perhaps there was not so subtle manipulation from
investigators which may have discouraged such reports (the careful wording
described, though following certain lines, indicates no boundary that can't be
crossed to protect the organization), the situation clearly describes a bit of
an ethical crisis. To attempt to paint it as commonplace in other
organizations does an egregious disservice to the majority of companies that
carry out business honorably everyday. This is only another example of tech
organizations that sprung up without mature business people to run them and
more budget than anything which grow much faster than is healthy and end up
doing anything to survive. This trend will unfortunately continue as the
concept of value and profitability continues to lose definition in our
economy.

------
trentnix
The gall! Do they think they are a University Title IX Office or something?

------
not_a_cop75
Doesn't give me much hope for the future of Uber. Which crimes will not be
reported by Uber? Where will they draw the line? Murder? Rape?

~~~
journalctl
What about all of the crimes they commit? Or are skirting regulations and
breaking laws not crimes anymore?

------
linuxftw
Remember when Uber disabled the emergency braking system in an autonomous
vehicle and killed a person?

They're not an ethical company. They think it's acceptable to put dangerous,
unproven technology in the hands of teenagers and subsequently killed a person
that a normal human driver would not have hit.

------
Nasrudith
While uber is a shifty as hell company at best I am not sure if they are wrong
here without any mandated reporter requirements.

While it is a bad look one "oops" from something that looks bad could cause
harm to an innocent party for what victimized parties usually report already.
That could rightfully lead to them being at fault in a multimillion dollar
lawsuit and even worse headlines like "Uber got kids taken away from Gold Star
father". Seems shitty but the right thing to do at scale.

~~~
CaptainZapp
I think the main issue here is the public face they try to maintain (we're a
changed company, tech bro' dude culture is now erradicated, we take security
very seriously, etc ad nauseum) with what they are really pulling off in the
back end.

Namely the exact same shit that they always did.

Do they still charge $1 "security" surcharge, which Uber actually just
pocketed?

~~~
sceptical
How can Uber pocket this surcharge? Clearly Uber pays for background checks,
insurance as well as the investigators mentioned here.

~~~
CaptainZapp
_How can Uber pocket this surcharge?_

Oh, they absolutely did[1]

[1] [https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-449-million-safe-
rides-...](https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-449-million-safe-rides-
fees-2016-8?r=US&IR=T)

