undefined | Better HN

0 pointskyledrake11y ago0 comments

While I would often usually with you, the nature of sexual assault is that even in "developed" countries, it is very hard to convict people for committing these offenses, and very often the accused walk. I can only imagine how much worse this is in countries that are less than friendly to women (I am not saying that India is better or worse, I don't know).

I don't think it would have hurt them to err on the side of caution on this one. It's certainly possible that their background check simply was unable to see this information, but given the pattern Uber seems to be building for themselves here, it would be really hard for me to believe their explanation of what happened anyways.

Throw the other problems away: this is the actual problem at Uber. The fatal flaw Uber continues to make is that they fail to build trust, which brings their activities into question every time something like this happens. At this rate, it's just going to keep getting worse.

I actually can't believe the board hasn't taken any action here. I've never in my life seen a startup more in need of a board intervention.

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

tomp11y ago· 4 in thread

> I don't think it would have hurt them to err on the side of caution on this one.

Erring "on the side of caution" in this case basically means denying someone a job, a livelihood, based on mere allegations that anyone can make. If you strictly enforce this (or even harsher variants, e.g. "no men sitting next to children on planes"), you make it very simple to ruin someone's life.

kyledrakeOP11y ago

We're not talking about plane customers here, we're talking about the pilots. Finding trusted drivers in a situation where safety is important because people are in a unique position to trust that driver with their lives, with a startup that has to be extra-careful to prevent major controversies while they are under a heavy spotlight doing ambiguously legal things (or in the case of Portland a few days ago, just outright, unambiguously breaking the law and then trying to pass the legal buck to their drivers).

The notion that women are filing police reports and potentially going to court over something so serious is not really something I would describe as a simple way to ruin someone's life. Nor would Uber rejecting an application due to a sexual assault allegation really qualify to me as a life ruiner.

Law very often fails justice, particularly in sexual assault cases. When laws don't work, it's the job of a company to recognize when and how that failure occurs, and manage that risk. Uber failed to manage that risk, and most disturbingly, I can't even figure out if they care.

rgbrenner11y ago

Exactly. When a person is put in a trusted position over another, we often have these higher standards.. teachers for example.

A cab driver -- who's capable of locking the doors and taking their passenger to wherever they want -- is in such a trusted position, and there should be a higher standard for those positions.

This doesn't mean they are being prevented from working. They're being prevented from working in this position. They are free to go do something else where other people aren't trusting their lives to them.

1 more reply

tomp11y ago

> When laws don't work, it's the job of a company to recognize when and how that failure occurs, and manage that risk.

OK, we can agree to disagree. Companies (and most other institutions) care much more about publicity and their reputation than about justice; the recent UVA "rape culture" scandal shows that pretty clearly that mob "justice" very often has nothing to do with actual justice.

rodgerd11y ago

> Erring "on the side of caution" in this case basically means denying someone a job, a livelihood, based on mere allegations that anyone can make

Congratulations! You've just repeated the argument that lead to the Catholic Church preotecting pedophiles and Jimmy Saville getting a free reign over children, mental health patients, and corpses!

tracker111y ago

I don't think a single accusation (not conviction) of rape should be enough to convict. As someone who was falsely accused when I was younger, it's pretty hard to get past the stigma of even an accusation in the moment.

I would say that multiple arrests (even without conviction) may be enough to bar certain types of employment, at an employers discretion, such as ride services where there is an increased risk.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse