Hey at least they didn't try to cheat you with a long drive/thumbing cash/saying their reader was broken which has been my general cab experience.
Oh been there too. It's why I always have the destination up in Google before I get in, and always pay by card, and if they say their reader is broken I'll say that sounds like their problem and I'm leaving. I've noticed that trick seems to have fallen out of favor though.
The main things about Uber that I simply cannot imagine giving up and which I see no reason cab companies couldn't implement if they just wanted to stop being shitty shitty shit shits:
1) Decent hailing app, with ability to leave feedback on drivers, and decent estimates on wait time for a car, and estimate of fare if I input a destination
2) Email receipt with time, mileage, fare, and a map of the ride
3) Payment handled through app, not driver, so I simply get out when we get there
4) No tip. Yes, Uber needs to charge more in this case. But I firmly believe paying for service shouldn't be optional. I cannot stress enough how much I enjoy eating out in countries where tipping just isn't a thing. Tipping is stupid, and should die. However, if tip is still a thing, see (3)...I want it done through the app, after I'm out of the car and the driver is gone.
Really that's it, and I don't think that's too much to ask. Sure, I like having normal POV trims rather than the plastic/vinyl motif of most cabs, but provided it doesn't smell entirely of vomit I'm really not that picky there. On (3), I believe Vancouver's app had this option, but you had to sign up for a whole account and such, which I don't want to have to do in every city I visit, especially for a single ride.
Fwiw Flywheel does all of the above save the map of the trip.
Fwiw Flywheel does all of the above save the map of the trip.
Huh. I'll have to give it a try. I do like the map, if only because it gives me an idea if any routing shenanigans happened (without having to keep google maps open during the ride). But Flywheel looks interesting, and worth a shot. Thanks!
Had to take a cab from the airport the other day because Uber is banned (they can drop you off, but apparently have to jump through some hoops to pick you up). It cost three times as much before tip as the uber did to get there (including the tip).
Cabs basically have a captive audience at the airport, our meter was at $7 before we even left the garage when the non-airport flag drop fee is $2.50.
Had to take a cab from the airport the other day because Uber is banned (they can drop you off, but apparently have to jump through some hoops to pick you up). It cost three times as much before tip as the uber did to get there (including the tip).
Cabs basically have a captive audience at the airport, our meter was at $7 before we even left the garage when the non-airport flag drop fee is $2.50.
Cab prices are regulated, and focusing on price as a selling point for Uber is a losing argument, because at current rates drivers barely get paid. Uber's low prices are a problem, not a benefit. Uber needs to win on service, not price.
In Seattle, they finally allowed Uber to pick up at the airport. A fee is added, like $5 or more, and various logistical regulations put in place to keep it from being a clusterfuck. Which basically puts them back into competition with the regulated cab industry.
The FTC approved the settlement in a 2-1 vote. The dissenting voter, FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen, objected because she didn't believe Uber's actions harmed consumers.
Well no shit, the complaint had nothing to do with consumers! "Sure, fuck over your employees all you want as long as it doesn't hurt consumers."
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
0
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
Shoot, if they weren't awful to their employees I might even use their service...
Well, no I wouldn't because Travis Kalanick would still be the douchiest Libertarian in Silicon Valley, and their company would still have a horrible track record for privacy, and pulling stunts like deploying self driving cars after the SF Bike Coalition told them their software would kill cyclists, or refusing to pay medical bills for a woman one of their drivers permanently crippled.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
"Not taking a car for hire at all" is still an option for a lot of people. It's what a lot of people, like me, did before Uber.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
Walking, public transportation, etc. The January price cut to increase the number of rides appears to indicate that demand is elastic. They probably could charge 2x and make money but the profit margin would be slim and would in no way justify their insane valuation.
khain on
+1
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
Also apps for taxi companies that are nigh identical in functionality to Uber exist, been using Flywheel for a couple years now. If the issue is lack of a taxi fleet in your locale Lyft seems a fuck of a lot more ethical than Uber and is pretty equivalently priced isn't it?
Also apps for taxi companies that are nigh identical in functionality to Uber exist, been using Flywheel for a couple years now. If the issue is lack of a taxi fleet in your locale Lyft seems a fuck of a lot more ethical than Uber and is pretty equivalently priced isn't it?
Legit question: Is Lyft better?
0
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
Also apps for taxi companies that are nigh identical in functionality to Uber exist, been using Flywheel for a couple years now. If the issue is lack of a taxi fleet in your locale Lyft seems a fuck of a lot more ethical than Uber and is pretty equivalently priced isn't it?
Legit question: Is Lyft better?
I think so. At the very least Kalanick isn't their CEO. And when the insurance debacle was happening in CA I remember them being more amenable to working with the government to get things right. They seem to have less of a reckless disregard for human life than Uber but they could just have better PR.
Regardless, Uber has proven themselves morally bankrupt enough times they don't have a place on my phone.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
"Not taking a car for hire at all" is still an option for a lot of people. It's what a lot of people, like me, did before Uber.
My issue was the inconvenience of shitty drivers and system. It wasn't how much I was charged. It was having no idea how much I would be.
Uber needs to stop thinking there's strong competition against them. I would happily pay two to three times what I do for their service. They don't need to keep screwing over their employees.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
"Not taking a car for hire at all" is still an option for a lot of people. It's what a lot of people, like me, did before Uber.
My issue was the inconvenience of shitty drivers and system. It wasn't how much I was charged. It was having no idea how much I would be.
This is pretty much what it comes down to for me. I've an instance where a cab ride was $5 one way (don't judge me, it was on a road down a shitty windey hill that was dangerous to just walk on), and it cost me $20 to get home. Picked up and dropped off at the same place, no traffic either way.
Bullshit like that is what turns me off of cabs. Uber has surge pricing, but at least I know what I'm getting into when I order the car.
The price difference from the story I told earlier wouldn't have even been as bad if I didn't feel like I was getting ripped off by what essentially amounted to a $7 pickup fee (almost triple a normal one) of a captive consumer. Maybe that's airport fees, but even that's a little in the bullshit side.
I don't know if it's the Women's March triggering it, or some other factor, but Lyft is surging up to 700% over a huge portion of the greater LA area this morning.
Pretty sure the highest I'd seen previously was 600% on NYE.
Yes, Uber suspended surge pricing for trips to JFK this weekend, in response to the taxi strike over the travel ban.
meh
uber is shitty for several reasons
but this isn't one of them... it's a policy they adopted in response to criticism of surge pricing going skyward when there's a transportation shortage caused by some outside event... they listened to that criticism and adjusted their policy
shitty would have been jacking up the prices
the thing they did here was just not participate in the protest, along with most other companies involved in providing services to JFK, are they all shit too?
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Yes, Uber suspended surge pricing for trips to JFK this weekend, in response to the taxi strike over the travel ban.
And if they had kept it, you'd just be bitching about them gouging the people going there to protest.
Surge pricing is a really good idea in the abstract. But it is a terrible idea with outrage being the cornerstone of social and news narratives. Because anytime there is activity around it, it is an affront to somebody in some way.
Yea, the surge pricing was suspended a few hours after their CEO publicly condemned the EO. Then a few hours afterwards they tweeted clarifying that it wasn't about the strike.
Honestly the strike just made a shitload of trouble for the lawyers getting to help the victims while fucking over those who managed to get through the gestapo checkpoint.
Yes, Uber suspended surge pricing for trips to JFK this weekend, in response to the taxi strike over the travel ban.
And if they had kept it, you'd just be bitching about them gouging the people going there to protest.
Surge pricing is a really good idea in the abstract. But it is a terrible idea with outrage being the cornerstone of social and news narratives. Because anytime there is activity around it, it is an affront to somebody in some way.
No, because the protesters were using public transportation for the most part - hence why the AirTrain was shut down for a period this weekend.
Yes, Uber suspended surge pricing for trips to JFK this weekend, in response to the taxi strike over the travel ban.
meh
uber is shitty for several reasons
but this isn't one of them... it's a policy they adopted in response to criticism of surge pricing going skyward when there's a transportation shortage caused by some outside event... they listened to that criticism and adjusted their policy
shitty would have been jacking up the prices
the thing they did here was just not participate in the protest, along with most other companies involved in providing services to JFK, are they all shit too?
Allowing the surge pricing to stand would have supported the shutdown. There's a vast difference between pulling surge pricing due to an active shooter, and pulling it because taxicab drivers in New York (many of whom are Muslim) are shutting down service in opposition to a horrible, racist policy. There's a reason why #deleteUber became a response to the pulling of surge pricing during the shutdown.
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Aioua on
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
They should have stopped operation in the geographical region in solidarity.
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
if anything having non-surge pricing was more of a stoppage than having surge pricing
they do surges when there's more demand than there are drivers, so that more drivers come out to meet that demand
by keeping the prices flat they lowered the supply of drivers
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
as far as I can tell Lyft also continued service to JFK?
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I can see it as a liability thing: you don't want to be caught encouraging your people to go to a demonstration, lest the demonstration turn into a riot, somebody's car gets torched, and then the owner turns around and sues you for encouraging her (via pay incentives) to go into the dangerous situation that caused her to suffer material loss.
The ride-hailing company Lyft is pledging to donate $1 million to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in response to President Donald Trump’s immigration ban.
In a letter emailed to customers early Sunday morning, Lyft co-founders John Zimmer and Logan Green announced their decision to donate money to help “defend our constitution.”
The email condemned Trump’s executive order halting the Syrian refugee program and banning entry to all citizens of several Muslim-majority countries.
They already have a big ass hole in their financials. Their profit is nonexistent and it's all based on "growth potential" i.e. nonexistent future predictions. Their endgame is a monopoly on public transit, just keep that in mind. All the "money lost" is just a sacrifice for the cause.
But yes, deleting accounts and promoting lyft would change their "growth potential" estimates and cause them to "lose money" (but can you lose money you don't already have?).
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
They should have stopped operation in the geographical region in solidarity.
So a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the EO or any control over it would be stranded at the airport as well because "sucks to be them"? A large union like the taxi's making a statement and refusing to service the airport is a respectable move, and makes a big statement. Making it so even more innocent people (emphasizing this because we can reasonably assume all of the people stranded at the airport because of the EO are innocent as well) can't get home doesn't.
LostNinja on
+2
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
edited January 2017
I actually agree with AH on this one. Uber's advertising surge pricing reads as attempting to take advantage of the situation - people without cab service looking to spend their transportation dollars elsewhere.
This probably wouldn't have been too much of a thing, if Uber wasn't already operating under a problematic and anti-worker business model.
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
They should have stopped operation in the geographical region in solidarity.
So a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the EO or any control over it would be stranded at the airport as well because "sucks to be them"? A large union like the taxi's making a statement and refusing to service the airport is a respectable move, and makes a big statement. Making it so even more innocent people (emphasizing this because we can reasonably assume all of the people stranded at the airport because of the EO are innocent as well) can't get home doesn't.
If you're wondering why the labor movement in the US has collapsed, this statement illustrates the reason perfectly. The NY Taxi Workers Alliance did an hour-long work stoppage as a protest against a horrible, bigoted policy, and yet the concern is "but what about the people who were inconvenienced?" I would hope they would understand what was happening and support the action.
I actually agree with AH on this one. Uber's advertising surge pricing reads as attempting to take advantage of the situation - people without cab service looking to spend their transportation dollars elsewhere.
This probably wouldn't have been too much of a thing, if Uber wasn't already operating under a problematic and anti-worker business model.
What’s clear is that Uber’s reputation to a lot of people is garbage. No question, the service is insanely popular: millions of people use it or drive for it, and it’s fundamentally changed the way people all over the world get around. But a not-insignificant portion of the app’s userbase sees it as a necessary evil. They don’t own a car and public transit can be shitty and unreliable, so they swallow their discomfort and use Uber because it’s fast and it works.
But Trump’s immigration ban proved to be a tipping point for many people, and one that also exposed Uber’s fundamental weakness: its customers aren’t as loyal as the company thinks.
Hedgie I 100% believe if they had kept surge pricing on you'd be in here complaining about that.
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
They should have stopped operation in the geographical region in solidarity.
So a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the EO or any control over it would be stranded at the airport as well because "sucks to be them"? A large union like the taxi's making a statement and refusing to service the airport is a respectable move, and makes a big statement. Making it so even more innocent people (emphasizing this because we can reasonably assume all of the people stranded at the airport because of the EO are innocent as well) can't get home doesn't.
If you're wondering why the labor movement in the US has collapsed, this statement illustrates the reason perfectly. The NY Taxi Workers Alliance did an hour-long work stoppage as a protest against a horrible, bigoted policy, and yet the concern is "but what about the people who were inconvenienced?" I would hope they would understand what was happening and support the action.
Sorry, can you quote where I attacked or criticized the Taxi Union's actions here because it sure as hell wasnt the one you responded to where I actively made a point of stating that their action was a good and respectable move?
IANAL but I see why they didn't It would be a massive violation of their contracts with the workers as I understand it. They can't tell people when of where to work. They are legally independent contractors and any direct pressure to make them work or not work in an area would just open them to massive problems and potentially an existential threat to their very business model. The only way they could de-incentivise picking people up would be to turn off surge pricing and make it worth less money than working else where. I too would like their contractors to actually be employees but getting pissed they didn't play right into a lawsuit alleging they are after as many as they have been through seems silly. They aren't setting the rules of what an independent contractor is, despite their best efforts.
I actually agree with AH on this one. Uber's advertising surge pricing reads as attempting to take advantage of the situation - people without cab service looking to spend their transportation dollars elsewhere.
This probably wouldn't have been too much of a thing, if Uber wasn't already operating under a problematic and anti-worker business model.
Yes, this was sort of a last straw or last nudge to move over to Lyft, for me.
Posts
Fwiw Flywheel does all of the above save the map of the trip.
Huh. I'll have to give it a try. I do like the map, if only because it gives me an idea if any routing shenanigans happened (without having to keep google maps open during the ride). But Flywheel looks interesting, and worth a shot. Thanks!
Cabs basically have a captive audience at the airport, our meter was at $7 before we even left the garage when the non-airport flag drop fee is $2.50.
Cab prices are regulated, and focusing on price as a selling point for Uber is a losing argument, because at current rates drivers barely get paid. Uber's low prices are a problem, not a benefit. Uber needs to win on service, not price.
In Seattle, they finally allowed Uber to pick up at the airport. A fee is added, like $5 or more, and various logistical regulations put in place to keep it from being a clusterfuck. Which basically puts them back into competition with the regulated cab industry.
Well no shit, the complaint had nothing to do with consumers! "Sure, fuck over your employees all you want as long as it doesn't hurt consumers."
Well, no I wouldn't because Travis Kalanick would still be the douchiest Libertarian in Silicon Valley, and their company would still have a horrible track record for privacy, and pulling stunts like deploying self driving cars after the SF Bike Coalition told them their software would kill cyclists, or refusing to pay medical bills for a woman one of their drivers permanently crippled.
Fuck Uber.
Here's the thing - you might, but I'd bet their metrics show that you're in the minority. Doubling their price would likely discourage casual users, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a major source of revenue.
As opposed to what? They could charge as much as any other taxi service and still have a vastly superior app.
"Not taking a car for hire at all" is still an option for a lot of people. It's what a lot of people, like me, did before Uber.
Walking, public transportation, etc. The January price cut to increase the number of rides appears to indicate that demand is elastic. They probably could charge 2x and make money but the profit margin would be slim and would in no way justify their insane valuation.
Legit question: Is Lyft better?
I think so. At the very least Kalanick isn't their CEO. And when the insurance debacle was happening in CA I remember them being more amenable to working with the government to get things right. They seem to have less of a reckless disregard for human life than Uber but they could just have better PR.
Regardless, Uber has proven themselves morally bankrupt enough times they don't have a place on my phone.
My issue was the inconvenience of shitty drivers and system. It wasn't how much I was charged. It was having no idea how much I would be.
This is pretty much what it comes down to for me. I've an instance where a cab ride was $5 one way (don't judge me, it was on a road down a shitty windey hill that was dangerous to just walk on), and it cost me $20 to get home. Picked up and dropped off at the same place, no traffic either way.
Bullshit like that is what turns me off of cabs. Uber has surge pricing, but at least I know what I'm getting into when I order the car.
The price difference from the story I told earlier wouldn't have even been as bad if I didn't feel like I was getting ripped off by what essentially amounted to a $7 pickup fee (almost triple a normal one) of a captive consumer. Maybe that's airport fees, but even that's a little in the bullshit side.
Pretty sure the highest I'd seen previously was 600% on NYE.
Yes, Uber suspended surge pricing for trips to JFK this weekend, in response to the taxi strike over the travel ban.
meh
uber is shitty for several reasons
but this isn't one of them... it's a policy they adopted in response to criticism of surge pricing going skyward when there's a transportation shortage caused by some outside event... they listened to that criticism and adjusted their policy
shitty would have been jacking up the prices
the thing they did here was just not participate in the protest, along with most other companies involved in providing services to JFK, are they all shit too?
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
And if they had kept it, you'd just be bitching about them gouging the people going there to protest.
Surge pricing is a really good idea in the abstract. But it is a terrible idea with outrage being the cornerstone of social and news narratives. Because anytime there is activity around it, it is an affront to somebody in some way.
Honestly the strike just made a shitload of trouble for the lawyers getting to help the victims while fucking over those who managed to get through the gestapo checkpoint.
No, because the protesters were using public transportation for the most part - hence why the AirTrain was shut down for a period this weekend.
Allowing the surge pricing to stand would have supported the shutdown. There's a vast difference between pulling surge pricing due to an active shooter, and pulling it because taxicab drivers in New York (many of whom are Muslim) are shutting down service in opposition to a horrible, racist policy. There's a reason why #deleteUber became a response to the pulling of surge pricing during the shutdown.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Yes, because I (someone who is stridently pro-union) wouldn't understand what a work stoppage is? And that I would be upset at them not undercutting the message of that stoppage, even if they weren't going to join in?
So they should have kept surge pricing, effectively paying people more to scab and undercut the message?
They should have stopped operation in the geographical region in solidarity.
if anything having non-surge pricing was more of a stoppage than having surge pricing
they do surges when there's more demand than there are drivers, so that more drivers come out to meet that demand
by keeping the prices flat they lowered the supply of drivers
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
They also pledged $1M to the ACLU.
But yes, deleting accounts and promoting lyft would change their "growth potential" estimates and cause them to "lose money" (but can you lose money you don't already have?).
So a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the EO or any control over it would be stranded at the airport as well because "sucks to be them"? A large union like the taxi's making a statement and refusing to service the airport is a respectable move, and makes a big statement. Making it so even more innocent people (emphasizing this because we can reasonably assume all of the people stranded at the airport because of the EO are innocent as well) can't get home doesn't.
This probably wouldn't have been too much of a thing, if Uber wasn't already operating under a problematic and anti-worker business model.
If you're wondering why the labor movement in the US has collapsed, this statement illustrates the reason perfectly. The NY Taxi Workers Alliance did an hour-long work stoppage as a protest against a horrible, bigoted policy, and yet the concern is "but what about the people who were inconvenienced?" I would hope they would understand what was happening and support the action.
The Verge had a good piece on how #deleteUber has been showing the company's loyalty problem:
Sorry, can you quote where I attacked or criticized the Taxi Union's actions here because it sure as hell wasnt the one you responded to where I actively made a point of stating that their action was a good and respectable move?
Yes, this was sort of a last straw or last nudge to move over to Lyft, for me.