Uber: The End of QoS

Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi has stepped forward in new television commercials as Uber's primary spokesperson to announce the company's renewed effort to listen to customers and drivers and move the company in a "new direction" with "new leadership" and a "new culture." The only problem is Uber has no business advertising any value proposition whatsoever because it doesn't own its cars and its drivers are not employees.

As a result of not treating drivers as employees and not owning its cars Uber cannot make a single promise to either its customers or its drivers. The advertising campaign itself is unique given that most of Uber's television advertising in the recent past has been oriented toward recruiting drivers.

In fact, even those driver recruitment ads were jarring given that most of the viewers would be the users of the service, not the drivers. In essence, the customers and the customer experience are clearly an afterthought in a business built upon recruiting drivers who receive little or no training, few if any background checks, no formal certification and are driving their own cars.

The television ads recruiting drivers made sense - Uber has an insatiable need of new drivers if it hopes to have drivers available whenever demand arises. Since Uber cannot guarantee or warranty any part of the customer experience, it's best that the company not even bring up the customer-facing value proposition other than vaguely promising to "do the right thing."

Let's review all the things that Uber cannot promise. Uber cannot promise that a car and driver will be available when needed. Even if an Uber is available - and clearly visible within the app - it is quite possible that that driver may refuse to make the pickup if the trip is too short or to a destination that the driver is not interested in.

If the driver comes on demand, as is customary, Uber cannot guarantee that the vehicle will be safe, clean or driven by a reliable or friendly driver. There are driver ratings that can be used as a reference. That is all. Dinging drivers is only useful in retrospect after the unpleasantness of a disappointing experience.

Uber also cannot guarantee that the driver will take the best, shortest, fastest or safest route to the destination. Uber drivers typically depend on outsourced navigation based on either Google maps or Waze. There is no central coordination of routing and no means for Uber drivers to communicate with one another and share routing and traffic tips.

Uber's promise to its drivers is even more dicey. Uber's dynamic compensation typically works out to little more than minimum wage (or less) performing a task for which there are no health or other customary benefits. (Uber has begun offering some benefits to drivers in the U.K. as an effort to mend fences with regulators who are weighing the permanent banning of the service.)

Frequent Uber riders have begun encountering the latest phenomenon in the transportation network company business: the drowsy Uber (or Lyft) driver. Make sure you get a good look at your Uber or Lyft driver next time. It's just possible that he or she has been pushing the limits of hours driven to make up for the lousy compensation or bag a bonus.

Is it possible to have wonderful experiences with Uber (and Lyft and Via and Grab) drivers? Yes, of course it is. Most are quite pleasant to talk with, if they can speak your language. The bottom line remains that none of these services are able to guarantee a particular quality of service. It is the Wal-Marting of transportation - a reduction of the transportation value proposition to its lowest common denominator.

The problem is that this race to this onerous bottom line continues to spiral downward with increasingly unreliable drivers and vehicles. At the same time, this race to the bottom line is dragging down the quality of other ad hoc transportation services - most notably the existing base of taxi drivers, five of whom have so far committed suicide in New York City alone as a result of their marginalization by Uber.

Uber's over-recruitment of drivers, a necessary phenomenon in a high turnover, ad hoc employmenet proposition, has the collateral negative impact of eroding the compensation of all taxi or ride hailing drivers. In my years of using Uber and Lyft I can honestly say I have never had the same driver twice and the average length of employment for the average driver is usually measured in months - anecdotally speaking.

The final gift of Uber to the broader transportation network is its stealing of transportation market share from existing public transporation options thereby clogging up roads with excess vehicles driven by uncertified and under-compensated drivers delivering an unreliable value proposition - though cheap. For all the happy talk from Uber's CEO the company cannot overcome the limitations of its own sketchy and unfair business model which forces customers and drivers to suspend their disbelief while eroding the overrall quality of transportation service delivery.

The final reckoning may be arriving in the form of legislation under consideration in California which would force Uber and Lyft to treat drivers as employees. This single provision, if adopted, is not only likely to spur similar legislation in other parts of the U.S. and the world, but also likely to level the playing field with existing ad hoc transportation providers. I love a cheap ride regardless of the source, but I am inclined to support this legislation in the interest of fairness, safety and the basic consumer interest in a reliable quality of service proposition. All eyes are now on California.

Postscript: BREAKING NEWS: https://www.9news.com/mobile/article/news/crime/police-uber-driver-fatally-shot-passenger-on-i-25/73-560535320

POLICE: UBER DRIVER FATALLY SHOT PASSENGER ON I-25

.... I rest my case.