Hacker News Reader

Comment by chdir | Hacker News Reader

To all those who think that this is a witch hunt against Uber, here's a glaring example of Uber compromising safety of their passengers. Had they taken timely action...

https://twitter.com/nps2113/status/542063133809192960

The lady was on TV saying that she had complained about the creepy driver to Uber, a few days before he committed the dastardly act. They gave an assurance but failed to act, which resulted in something much worse. Granted that the bigger culprit is the police here who let go off the individual despite his previous run-ins with the law. But Uber has absolutely failed the trust here. Just goes out to show that they care about $$ above everything else.

Response from Uber: https://twitter.com/nps2113/status/542352404478713857

News coverage: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-buck-stops-here/woman-c...

(Credit goes to a comment down below for first mentioning this)

View on HN

What makes us think that they didn't check on him? It would be harsh of Uber to suspend/terminate a driver from one complaint, and what kind of check could they have done to detect that he would attack passengers in this way in the future?

In any case, I think it's important to consider how this would play out in a pre-Uber world. If someone took a taxi ride and got attacked by the driver prior to Uber, there was very little evidence pointing to that driver. Passengers would need to remember their identification details or number plate after an event that tends to leave people quite mentally shaken. Not a good outcome; I think there's a good chance they would still be searching for the driver if this hadn't been facilitated by Uber.

If you are a company touting yourself as the 'safer' alternative to traditional taxis, you should take such complaints very seriously. A background check on the driver would have shown his previous convictions. They claim to do background checks [1], but in reality they skip it [2], atleast that's what happened in Delhi.

They are providing a false sense of security to the passengers.

[1] https://www.uber.com/safety

[2] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-we-did-not-run-backgrou...

It would be harsh of Uber to suspend/terminate a driver from one complaint,

Umm, depends on the nature of the complaint, don't it?

If you ran a restaurant, say, and you received a complaint about one of the male waiters "constantly staring" at a female customer in a way that she found sufficiently disturbing to write you an email about afterwards[1] -- at the very least you'd investigate. And if the investigation ended up sustaining the claims the customer was making, of course you'd fire the waiter on the spot. And there's be nothing in the least bit "harsh" about it.

But what's damning for Uber, of course, not only did they not investigate; they failed to meaningfully acknowledge her request. And this isn't a matter of poor training among their customer service reps; those poor folks are diligently acting on the priorities they've been given. And those priorities, of course, come from the top.

Also: back in the "pre-Uber" world, not only would the drivers at least have to go through a (meaningful) background check, but in many cities they'd have to risk losing their permits, which generally are worth something on the order of a driver's pension (or several years worth of pay in any case). In fact even being able to get a loan to buy one of these permits is a kind of a test for basic personal stability.

But in the brave, new Uber world? All you need is a phone.

[1] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation...

glaring example of Uber compromising safety of their passengers. Had they taken timely action...

The suspect in question was implicated in 2 other rape cases and on bail for multiple other criminal charges. At what point is the Indian government responsible for this guy being at large?

Also, what was reported to Uber was allegations of "staring" and just generally making the passenger feel uncomfortable. While thats definitely not cool and not the experience anyone wants to have with Uber, thats hardly enough to fire someone.

I don't think that them "acting" would've stopped anything. At the end of the day those drivers are contractors and I never judge Uber on what a driver says to me or how they act.

Uber has a duty to provide and ensure safety. I personally think they live up to that in the US.

> At what point is the Indian government responsible for this guy being at large?

Indian government is totally at fault. And so is Uber for lying about background checks and not taking the complaints seriously. This is not an isolated incident that shows their cavalier response. A follow-up from Uber on the complaint would have absolutely won my trust in the company.

> thats hardly enough to fire someone

Maybe run a background check based on a complaint, that would have given sufficient grounds to take action.

> Also, what was reported to Uber was allegations of "staring" and just generally making the passenger feel uncomfortable. While thats definitely not cool and not the experience anyone wants to have with Uber, thats hardly enough to fire someone.

Drivers that make passengers who are women uncomfortable due to harassment should absolutely 100% be fired. Sexual harassment is not tolerable for employees of a company, whether its to fellow employees and/or customers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com