[csharpminor]

Anecdotally speaking, I've noticed that Uber has become a dirty word among my friends. For example, someone using Uber will generally just say that they're calling a car rather than naming the service. Lyft doesn't have the same stigma. It should be concerning to management that the company's ethos is repelling customers.

Edit: Management should be far more concerned that Uber is allegedly an environment that systematically enables sexual harassment and discrimination against women.

[AsyncAwait]

Isn't that due to the perception that they broke the recent anti-Trump taxi strike, rather than their internal work culture?

[tedivm]

In the bay area at least a lot of us know at least one or two Uber engineers, and Uber has has an awful reputation around here for a lot longer than the month or so since that strike occurred. As a result of that (plus talking to drivers who work for both services and have strong preferences for Lyft) means that most of my friends were quietly boycotting Uber for years at this point.

I have one friend who worked at Uber and had years of experience working at another tech company beforehand. Uber basically refused to promote her, even going to far as to hire people significantly junior to her into those senior positions. In one case one of the people who was hired blatantly lied on their resume about their past experience, got caught out for it, and was still hired above her.

Even outside of the bay area Uber has taken many reputation hits for their stupid behavior. The whole incident where they were planning on digging up dirt on a reporter to ruin her character shows a huge lack of ethics at the top of the company. The "god mode" application and research into "one night stands" shows they have no respect for privacy.

[Throwadev]

I also hated the permissions increase they asked for about a month ago. They want to know my location for up to five minutes after I've finished taking a ride with their app? F--- that, uninstalled immediately.

[dllthomas]

> the perception that they broke the recent anti-Trump taxi strike

Something, it's worth noting, no less true of Lyft. And I think it's a little weird to be demanding owners of infrastructure lock out workers "in support of a strike". That whole reaction was absurd.

This article gives me substantially more pause.

[bryne]

I believe they're referring to the fact that Uber took specific action to promote itself by canceling surge pricing at JFK during the strike, not that it did anything passively through inaction.

Lyft did not negate surge pricing that day, AFAIK.

[dllthomas]

There's an argument that that's economically incoherent - a strike is about restricting supply, and surge is about increasing supply. Turning off surge does not work against the strike.

But that's actually immaterial: surge was turned off a half hour after the strike ended.

[RodericDay]

Lyft kept operating, Uber reacted to the strike by fixing low prices ensuring good will with desperate customers.

[asabjorn]

That's not the effect of turning off incentives that get more driver to go tot he area. Instead Ubers actions made it so that an increase in demand was not followed up with an increased amount of available drivers at the airport. It doesn't help you if prices are low if there are no cars available.

This was in my opinion a very appropriate way to respect the strike without forcing drivers to not make money unless they chose to do so themselves.

[RodericDay]

I've had this argument several times already, I'll sum it up one last time:

Lyft operating as normal: "Fuck this strike, making me pay tons of money bc of surge pricing"

Uber operating without surge: "OMG Uber my savior!!!!! / (can't actually find a cab bc of lack of availability) Whatever, not their fault, it's the stupid strike after all"

It was a calculated cynical ploy like literally everything else Uber does. I have no patience with them, particularly in a thread discussing sexual harassment within. Feel free to spin it as "a very appropriate way to respect the strike" or whatever.

[dllthomas]

Except Uber did not disable surge until a half-hour after the strike ended.

[dllthomas]

Yeah, it seems to me that optimal treatment of a strike would be something like: 1) cap surge (maybe to the typical value for the given time/area), 2) notify drivers when a request is from an affected area, 3) exclude cancellations of those rides from the drivers' metrics.

The biggest concern is that this puts Uber in the position of determining what is and isn't "legitimately a strike".

[dllthomas]

Except if you look at the timeline, surge was turned off some time after the strike ended.

[enjo]

Among my peer group (Denver) it's been the same. It has alot more to do with what we hear from drivers about the respective companies. For whatever reason drivers are happy to shill for Lyft and are often almost hostile towards Uber. At some point you just get the feeling that Uber isn't what we really wanna be supporting.

I should note: my peer group isn't particularly tech oriented.

[untog]

Same experience for me. Drivers all have stories of how Uber has screwed them over, but have nothing but positive things to say about Lyft.

[liveoneggs]

The few drivers I've spoken to say the Lyft app is simply way more reliable, for a start.

[csharpminor]

This predates #DeleteUber, and it's not only limited to the Bay Area. I've also observed this in Seattle, NYC, DC, Chicago, and to a lesser extent in LA.

The perception is closely tied to what people hear from drivers, constant negative media coverage, and being recognized as the epitome of a douchey tech company. Those three things combine to make using Uber distinctly un-cool in the eyes of many users. (Note that folks will use it anyway, but not talk about it.)

[afarrell]

Anecdotally, the perception among my acquaintances is that they treat their drivers less well than Lyft does.

[weberc2]

I don't think there is any stigma associated with Uber in Chicago. A lot of people will even say "I'm calling an Uber" even when they're using Lyft (name brand effect).

[floatrock]

Definitely true. Case study in "any publicity is good publicity" -- they're always in the news as the assholes, but the market reality is it's a better service than waving your hand and maybe having a cab stop where the first thing the guy says is "meter is broken, cash only".

The services are more or less identical, but I always feel like I'm in the minority when I tell friends I'm calling a lyft.

[0898]

I've noticed this. But tempting as it is to #DeleteUber, am I not mostly just hurting local taxi drivers who keep 75% of the revenue?

[Teodolfo]

Not if you use Lyft.

[0898]

Unfortunately, Lyft doesn't operate in the UK where I live.

[Throwadev]

But if you #DeleteUber won't your money be going to the taxi drivers? I'm not sure I understood your question.

[taneq]

They're using the term 'taxi drivers' to refer to the Uber drivers, not to local licensed taxi operators.

[falsedan]

In the UK, Uber cars are local licenced private hire vehicles with the big "Pre-booked fares only" sticker on the front doors. You have to be licensed to drive for Uber[0].

0: https://www.uber.com/en-GB/drive/requirements/