Saturday saw thousands of people make their way to JFK International Airport, to protest President Donald Trump’s newly signed immigration ban.
Some had a hard time getting there—New York City cab drivers had chosen to suspend their service in protest of the ban, while the subway service was being monitored by the NYPD.
NO PICKUPS @ JFK Airport 6 PM to 7 PM today. Drivers stand in solidarity with thousands protesting inhumane & unconstitutional #MuslimBan.— NY Taxi Workers (@NYTWA) January 28, 2017
As events continued to unfold, Uber released a message about its surge-pricing policy:
Surge pricing has been turned off at #JFK Airport. This may result in longer wait times. Please be patient.— Uber NYC (@Uber_NYC) January 29, 2017
The company seemed to want to assure its users that it wouldn’t be capitalizing on their protest, and that they would be able to get to the airport without an additional charge. But the response was swift, and angry.
Several days after the move, #DeleteUber is still trending online, with articles circulating on how to delete the app. It has gained enough traction that Uber has placed a link to its statement against the ban on its deletion page:
Uber is directly linking to its "views on the immigration ban" in response to cancellation requests. pic.twitter.com/kCXvXbw09f— matthew braga (@mattbraga) January 31, 2017
So what could the company have done differently to avoid the backlash? Not much. On the afternoon in question, the company’s executives faced three options:
- Continue business as usual. The company wasn’t obligated to change its practices for the protest, and might have avoided attention had it done so. (Though it has received backlash before for allowing surge pricing to continue in situations were travellers have few other options.)
- Turn off the app altogether, in effect joining the taxi strike. After all, NYC cabbies were refusing to offer their services in protest. Wouldn’t it be best to do the same? It’s not that simple. Uber’s workforce is a loose network of contract drivers, meaning the company (deliberately) lacks the authority to speak for them as a whole. Unionized cab drivers have formal mechanisms in place to decide on things like enacting a work stoppage; Uber drivers don’t. Shutting down the service would unilaterally deprive drivers of access to fares—the whole basis of the company’s relationship with its workers.
- Continue operations, but turn off surge pricing to avoid the appearance of gouging riders in the absence of taxis.
There were no happy choices to be made here, only damage control. In that context, it’s not so surprising that Uber made the choice that it did. Faced with what seems like was an array of poor options, it decided on one that the company felt, perhaps foolishly, was best for its customers.
In the coming days, Uber will likely have to take measures to secure its position as the go-to ride sharing app (competitor Lyft is already slowly making its way up to the top of the app store list). Whatever they do, executives can fall back on the small reassurrance that, at the end of the day, they likely couldn’t have done anything differently.
- How to recover gracefully when you’ve blown a deadline
- An annotated guide on how not to break bad news
- Four ways CEOs can win back the public’s trust
- The new rules of recovering from a corporate scandal
- The real risk of Donald Trump’s potential business conflicts of interest
- Canada is cracking down on paid social media endorsements
- Capitalism, like baseball, has both written and unwritten rules
- Why corporate diversity programs fail, and what to do about it
- What to do when your celebrity spokesperson is caught in a scandal