Uber Passengers and Bad Ratings

Uber permits banishment of passengers from the kingdom of ride-sharing. What gets passengers on the list of exiles? Leaving litter in the car. Rudeness. And asking the driver to exceed the speed limit. Manners and ethics — all you need to be a solid Uberite.

About mmjdiary

Professor Marianne Jennings is an emeritus professor of legal and ethical studies from the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University, retiring in 2011 after 35 years of teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in ethics and the legal environment of business. During her tenure at ASU, she served as director of the Joan and David Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics from 1995-1999. In 2006, she was appointed faculty director for the W.P. Carey Executive MBA Program. She has done consulting work for businesses and professional groups including AICPA, Boeing, Dial Corporation, Edward Jones, Mattel, Motorola, CFA Institute, Southern California Edison, the Institute of Internal Auditors, AIMR, DuPont, AES, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Motorola, Hy-Vee Foods, IBM, Bell Helicopter, Amgen, Raytheon, and VIAD. The sixth edition of her textbook, Case Studies in Business Ethics, was published in February 2011. The ninth edition of her textbook, Business: lts Legal, Ethical and Global Environment was published in January 2011. The 23rd edition of her book, Business Law: Principles and Cases, will be published in January 2013. The tenth edition of her book, Real Estate Law, will also be published in January 2013. Her book, A Business Tale: A Story of Ethics, Choices, Success, and a Very Large Rabbit, a fable about business ethics, was chosen by Library Journal in 2004 as its business book of the year. A Business Tale was also a finalist for two other literary awards for 2004. In 2000 her book on corporate governance was published by the New York Times MBA Pocket Series. Her book on long-term success, Building a Business Through Good Times and Bad: Lessons from Fifteen Companies, Each With a Century of Dividends, was published in October 2002 and has been used by Booz, Allen, Hamilton for its work on business longevity. Her latest book, The Seven Signs of Ethical Collapse was published by St. Martin’s Press in July 2006 and has been a finalist for two book awards. Her weekly columns are syndicated around the country, and her work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times, Washington Post, and the Reader's Digest. A collection of her essays, Nobody Fixes Real Carrot Sticks Anymore, first published in 1994 is still being published. She has been a commentator on business issues on All Things Considered for National Public Radio. She has served on four boards of directors, including Arizona Public Service (1987-2000), Zealous Capital Corporation, and the Center for Children with Chronic Illness and Disability at the University of Minnesota. She was appointed to the board of advisors for the Institute of Nuclear Power Operators in 2004 and served on the board of trustees for Think Arizona, a public policy think tank. She has appeared on CNBC, CBS This Morning, the Today Show, and CBS Evening News. In 2010 she was named one of the Top 100 Thought Leaders in Business Ethics by Trust Across America. Her books have been translated into four different languages. She received the British Emerald award for authoring one of their top 50 articles in management publications, chosen from over 15,000 articles. Personal: Married since 1976 to Terry H. Jennings, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office Deputy County Attorney; five children: Sarah, Sam, and John, and the late Claire and Hannah Jennings.
This entry was posted in News and Events. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Uber Passengers and Bad Ratings

  1. Jay says:

    > Uber permits banishment of passengers from the kingdom of ride-sharing. What gets passengers on the list of exiles? Leaving litter in the car. Rudeness. And asking the driver to exceed the speed limit. Manners and ethics — all you need to be a solid Uberite.

    1. That’s not quite true, because all of this is judged by the driver, who can be capricious, inconsistent, or grumpy with traffic or even sexist, racist, or *phobic

    2. And since Uber is a megacorp, most of this is unappealable process, a process without due process or equal protection, leaving Uber in the unethical position of having bought into a monopoly through unethical, illegal, and unsafe practices that undercut not just taxis but city transportation and can now contribute to Johnny or Jane being a social outcast due to some perceived crime, judged not by a jury of peers but by a poorly paid ill-treated Uber drivers whose sole method of getting back at Uber is by harshly judging riders.

    Fun fun fun.

  2. Jay says:

    > to Johnny or Jane being a social outcast due to some perceived crime,

    to clarify, Uber’s denial of rides to Jane in a city where Uber is the defacto ride provider, made possible by VC subsidized purchase of a monopoly (Uber just lost $1 Billion dollars in its latest quarter (holds 1 thousand pinky fingers to side of mouth) as well as illegal and unsafe practices can place a huge monetary and social burden on Jane, and all of that unappealable, and without due process and equal protection.

  3. mmjdiary says:

    Sounds to me as if you might have a bit of experience with negative driver feedback. Johnny and Jane may have to rent a car. Welcome to the world of market disruptors. When any new business fills a void (they are defacto ride providers) they have market power. Those with markets power can pick and choose. And it is their right to do so as a private entity. If you want passenger rights, you need a taxi company and taxi authority. Uber and Lyft play in a parallel universe. The government allows them to operate, but have given them what they wanted when they started — a laissez-faire approach. You live by laissez-faire, you die by laissez-fair (or in this case “laissez-fare.”). There is always a cost to cheaper goods and services. You have a fad that took off, all the way to an IPO without the users and the company thinking through the costs, consequences, and business model itself.

    The piece posted was not pro-Uber or pro-rider or pro-driver. It was about manners and obeying the law — sort of a low ethical bar in any business and its relationships with customers. Sometimes we have consequences for our behavior — and all without a jury of our peer Uber users.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.