Lyft Says Uber’s Recruitment Efforts Are Hurting Drivers | Hacker News Reader

Lyft Says Uber’s Recruitment Efforts Are Hurting Drivers

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

29 pointskanamekun9 comments

While both Uber and Lyft have their points, I don't think there is anything illegal going on that might cause regulators to get involved.

So any repurcussions, if at all, have to come from customers who use Uber and Lyft. Lyft is hoping people will see it as the honest, scrappy challenger and Uber as the sleazy, corpulent incumbent.

But I sincerely doubt enough people care about principles in today's instant-gratification age. Or about supporting the smaller guy (most people I know are nonchalant about using Google, Facebook and couldn't be bothered to find alternatives).

Meanwhile Uber can (and will) continue burning as much money as it takes to disrupt Lyft, hoping that when the dust settles and it controls, say, 80% of the market, customers will have no real choice.

I think you're mistaking Lyft's strategy. They aren't principally hoping that passengers regard Uber as scummy. They hope that the (more engaged) drivers will. All of this communication about Uber recruiters costing drivers money, Uber recruiters canceling rides, but don't worry, we're safeguarding you -- it's about setting up a bad impression of Uber and their recruiting habits before the recruiter actually talks to a driver.

Airbnb still has a spammer in charge, which shows that the tolerated level of sociopathy is way too high for this incident to have any consequences.

I have a hard time making anything out of the "facts" here from Lyft. Apparently Uber has cancelled about 5k trips over the past year. That ends up being about 1 cancelled trip every 5 days in each Lyft city (I can't imagine that's nearly enough volume to disrupt anything). What's more, they're now claiming that 85% of trips by Uber contractors are cancelled. That means Uber's alleged master plan is to get into one Lyft car every 2 months for each Lyft city?

Something doesn't add up here. This seems much more like a company on the way out trying kick up some dust. There's no way any of these reported numbers make sense.

I'd switch over just to get rid of that stupid mustache.

Uber is well within their rights to pay for Lyft rides and solicit their drivers, and Lyft has every right to implement systems to prevent Uber's tactics.

If what Uber says is true regarding their denial of intentional cancellations, then I have no issue with what they're doing. These drivers are not Lyft employees. They are independent contractors providing their services and will jump ship at the prospect of making more money elsewhere. I have spoken to dozens of drivers, and there is no sense of loyalty. They are not under contract to work exclusively with Lyft. In fact many drivers are using both services simultaneously.

The analogy used by Jason Fried about entering an engineer's office really does not apply. An engineer does not interface with their customers and the outside word in their office. There is a sanctity to someone's office, and a barrier that separates work from the world, that does not apply to cab cars. A driver's job is to open their office and to invite in the world, and little is off limits. I have spoken to drivers about everything from racism to politics, to soccer, and mentioning another car service and how it may benefit them more hardly seems to violate some sort of unwritten code of ethics. I as a customer cannot storm into your cubicle and do the same.

I said this on twitter, but I'll say it here too: What Uber is doing is no different than paying for a haircut at a barbershop, sitting in the barber's chair, striking up conversation, and suggesting they join your high-end boutique. That's sales, that's competition, that's business.

I think we'd all like to hold on to the notion that business (and sales and competition) doesn't have to be done this way.

What is wrong or unethical about it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com