news analysis
Mark Bursa
The well-publicised Uber Leaks shine a spotlight on malpractice at the ride-hailing giant from 2013-17. But Uber claims it has changed more than its management since then. Mark Bursa looks at the evidence.
Change management T
he “Uber Files” revelations about the ride-hailing market leader are
perhaps unsurprising. The company’s behaviour under founder Travis Kalanick was widely reported, especially when Kalanick was removed from the business.
And the attempts in 2015 by the Cameron government to pressurise then-London mayor Boris Johnson into giving Uber an easy ride (and to cover up any lobbying meetings) were extensively covered in these pages. Johnson actually won that bout of Bullingdon Club willy-waving, which resulted in resignations at TfL and Uber. Subsequently Uber lost its London licence and has had to fight hard to regain it. Though by that stage it was so well established in the capital it was perhaps too big to fail. Uber’s response to the Uber Files leak has been predictable. The leak saw 83,000 internal emails from 2013-17 released to The Guardian by former Uber lobbyist Mark MacGann, who left the company in 2016. Uber immediately sought to distancing itself from the actions of its pre-2017 management, claiming that under Kalanick’s replacement Dara Khosrowshahi, Uber is “a different company”. In a statement, Uber said: “When we say Uber is a different company today, we mean it literally: 90% of current Uber employees joined after Dara became CEO.” The statement continued: “There has been no shortage of reporting on Uber’s mistakes prior to 2017. Thousands of stories have been published, multiple books have been written – there’s even been a TV series.” There is plenty of truth in this argument. Professional Driver has covered Uber’s rise since 2012, and relations were, for many years, less than amicable. In particular, Uber’s then-PR representatives did not take well our reporting of Uber’s automated system implementing surge pricing during terrorist attacks in London.
16
Since Khosrowshahi’s arrival, and in particular since the arrival of now-departed Jamie Heywood as European chief, relations with the company became much more businesslike, especially when Uber acquired dispatch systems provider Autocab. This led to the implementation of major changes to the way Uber operates outside London, linking via Autocab’s iGo network to local taxi firms under the Uber Local Cab scheme. Indeed, Uber has not opened up a direct operation in any UK town since 2017, with all expansion coming from Local Cab – including in major cities such as Manchester, where local taxi firms compete with Uber’s existing operations for Uber jobs. Satisfaction with the deal is high among those taxi firms that have signed up for Local Cab.
Uber whistleblower and former lobbyist Mark MacGann
So in the way it operates outside London, Uber’s UK operations have undoubtedly undergone a massive change of direction. Interviewed by Professional Driver in 2020, Heywood admitted that, if the company were starting afresh, it would have taken this route from the start. In London, though, there’s no likelihood of a switch to a “Local Cab” type of service. The numbers are not there, and Uber’s big city business model is well established. There has been a softer and less confrontational approach to dealing with the regulator – Uber realised it needed fewer enemies as it battled TfL to get its licence back. Having lost the licence following multiple breaches of security, including drivers using false IDs and numerous complaints of assaults on passengers, it has had no choice but to tighten up safety standards and improve its relations with drivers. Problems remain, however. Despite broadly accepting the High Court’s ruling regarding its drivers’ “worker” status”, more militant trades unions such as the App Drivers and Couriers Union (ACDU) have continued to take action against Uber, including a strike last week over the fact that Uber does not consider drivers’ waiting time as being “on the job”, despite the court ruling that should be the case. ACDU claims this is costing drivers 40% of their earnings. In a statement, ACDU said: “Uber has failed to comply with the Supreme Court and lower court rulings to pay drivers at least the minimum wage after costs for all working time from log on to log off.” In response, Uber dismissed the protest as representing only a vocal minority of drivers. A spokesperson said: “The ADCU represents a tiny proportion of active drivers on Uber. For over a year now, GMB Union has served as the voice of drivers in the UK following our historic recognition agreement which helped secure new worker
JULY 2022
