Categories
Amazon.com Inc Apple Inc Cambridge Analytica Colleges and Universities Computers and the Internet Facebook Inc Google Inc Hiring and Promotion Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized your-feed-innovation your-feed-work

‘Techlash’ Hits College Campuses

In 2006, Google bought YouTube for more than $1 billion, Apple was preparing to announce the first iPhone, and the American housing bubble began to deflate. Claire Stapleton, then a senior at the University of Pennsylvania, faced the same question over and over: What did she plan to do with that English degree? She flirted, noncommittally, with Teach for America.

Then, a Google recruiter came to campus and, Ms. Stapleton said, she “won ‘American Idol.’” The company flew her out to Mountain View, Calif., which felt to her “like the promised land” — 15 cafeterias, beach volleyball courts, Zumba classes, haircuts and laundry on-site.

But for Ms. Stapleton, now 34, the real appeal in a job at Google was what seemed to be a perfect balance of working for income and according to one’s conscience. Naturally, she said yes to an offer in the corporate communications department.

“There was this ambient glow of being part of a company that was changing the world,” Ms. Stapleton said. “I was totally googly-eyed about it.”

More than a decade later, college seniors and recent graduates looking for jobs that are both principled and high-paying are doing so in a world that has soured on Big Tech. The positive perceptions of Google, Facebook and other large tech firms are crumbling.

Many students still see employment in tech as a ticket to prosperity, but for job seekers who can afford to be choosy, there is a growing sentiment that Silicon Valley’s most lucrative positions aren’t worth the ethical quandaries.

Image
Credit…Rafael Rios for The New York Times

“Working at Google or Facebook seemed like the coolest thing ever my freshman year, because you’d get paid a ton of money but it was socially responsible,” said Chand Rajendra-Nicolucci, 21, a senior at the University of Michigan. “It was like a utopian workplace.”

Now, he said, “there’s more hesitation about the moral qualities of these jobs. It’s like how people look at Wall Street.”

The growing skepticism of Silicon Valley, sometimes referred to as the “techlash,” has spared few of technology’s major players.

In 2019, Facebook was fined nearly $5 billion by the Federal Trade Commission for mishandling user data. Amazon canceled its plans for a New York City headquarters after residents, union leaders and local legislators contested the idea that the behemoth should receive $3 billion from the state to set up shop. Google, in 2018, faced internal protests over its plans for a censored search engine in China and handling of sexual harassment. (High-ranking Google employees have stated that the company never planned to expand search into China, but also that plans for a China project had been “terminated.”)

The share of Americans who believe that technology companies have a positive impact on society has dropped from 71 percent in 2015 to 50 percent in 2019, according to a 2019 Pew Research Center survey.

At this year’s Golden Globes, Sacha Baron Cohen compared Mark Zuckerberg to the main character in “JoJo Rabbit”: a “naïve, misguided child who spreads Nazi propaganda and only has imaginary friends.”

That these attitudes are shared by undergraduates and graduate students — who are supposed to be imbued with high-minded idealism — is no surprise. In August, the reporter April Glaser wrote about campus techlash for Slate. She found that at Stanford, known for its competitive computer science program, some students said they had no interest in working for a major tech company, while others sought “to push for change from within.”

Belce Dogru, who graduated from Stanford with a degree in computer science last year and is completing a master’s program at the university, said: “There has definitely been a shift in conversation on campus.”

Stanford is the second-biggest feeder school for jobs in Silicon Valley, according to data from HiringSolved, a software company focused on recruiting. Some companies pay as much as $12,000 to advertise at the university’s computer science job fairs; recruiters at those events didn’t always have to make a hard sell.

“It felt like in my freshman year Google, Palantir and Facebook were these shiny places everyone wanted to be. It was like, ‘Wow, you work at Facebook. You must be really smart,’” said Ms. Dogru, 23. “Now if a classmate tells me they’re joining Palantir or Facebook, there’s an awkward gap where they feel like they have to justify themselves.”

Palantir, in particular, has drawn the ire of students at Stanford for providing services to U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (also known as ICE).

Last summer, a campus activist group, Students for the Liberation of All People, visited the company’s office, a 15-minute walk from campus, and hung a banner nearby that read: “Our software is so powerful it separates families.” Similar protests took place at the University of California, Berkeley, Brown and Yale, according to Recode. The protests, and the attitudes they reflected, were also covered in The Los Angeles Times.

Audrey Steinkamp, a 19-year-old sophomore at Yale, which sends about 10 percent of each graduating class into tech, said that taking a job in Silicon Valley is seen as “selling out,” no different from the economics majors going into consulting who are “lovingly and not-so-lovingly called ‘snakes.’”

That is especially true, some of the students said, when a classmate chooses to work for Facebook, whose products have spread disinformation and helped influence a presidential election.

“The work you do at a place like Facebook could be harmful at a much larger scale than an investment bank,” Ms. Dogru said. “It’s in the pockets of millions of people, and it’s a source of news for millions of people. It’s working at a scary scale.”

Many students still believe that technology can help change the world for good. As Ms. Glaser put it for Slate, some of them are opting out of the Big Tech pipeline and trying, instead, “to use technical skills as an insurance policy against dystopia.”

“Students have an opportunity to look at where they can have the most impact that’s in line with their values,” said Leslie Miley, a former director of engineering at Google and Slack. “The fact of the matter is Google, Facebook, Twitter are not in line with those values because they’re huge companies beholden to a lot of different masters.”

Anna Geiduschek, a software engineer who graduated from Stanford in 2014, was working at Dropbox last year when she received an email from an Amazon Web Services recruiter. She replied that she wouldn’t consider a job with the company unless Amazon cut its contract with Palantir.

“These companies go out of their way to try and woo software engineers, and I realized it would send a powerful message for me as a potential employee to tell them no,” Ms. Geiduschek, 27, said, noting that top tech companies sometimes spend roughly $20,000 to recruit a single engineer. “You could basically cut them off at their supply.”

Her recruiter responded: “Wow I honestly had no idea. I will run this up to leadership.” Days later, Ms. Geiduschek received another template email from an Amazon hiring manager, so she scheduled a call and aired her grievances by phone.

Some engineers are sharing screenshots of their protest emails on Twitter with the hashtag #TechWontBuildIt. Jackie Luo, an engineer, sent an email to Google saying that she wouldn’t consider a job there given its plans to re-enter China with a censored search engine.

Kelly Carter, a web developer, emailed a Tesla recruiter with her concerns about the company’s anti-union tactics. Craig Chasseur, a software engineer, emailed the H.R. department at Salesforce to critique the company’s contract with ICE.

These protests echo mounting public concerns about the power of these corporations. But it’s not clear whether they have moved the needle for prospective hires.

Former recruiters for Facebook told CNBC in May that the acceptance rate for full-time engineering job offers at the company had dropped precipitously, as much as 40 percent.

After the article’s publication, Facebook disputed the figure; the company “regularly ranks high on industry lists of most attractive employers,” a spokesman said. Data published the same month by LinkedIn showed that tech firms continued to hire at high rates, especially for entry-level employees.

But at campus career centers, students are struggling with the dual, and sometimes dueling, desires for prestige and purpose.

“It started with millennials, but now Gen Z-ers are getting educated because they want to do good in the world,” said Sue Harbour, the senior associate director of the career center at the University of California, Berkeley, which is Silicon Valley’s top feeder, according to HiringSolved. “And as we’ve seen tech companies grow, we’ve also seen the need for more tech oriented to social responsibility.”

Some recent graduates are taking their technical skills to smaller social impact groups instead of the biggest firms. Ms. Dogru said that some of her peers are pursuing jobs at start-ups focused on health, education and privacy. Ms. Harbour said Berkeley offers a networking event called Tech for Good, where alumni from purpose-driven groups like Code for America and Khan Academy share career opportunities.

Ms. Geiduschek said she recently left Dropbox for Recidiviz, a nonprofit that builds technological tools for criminal justice reform.

But those so-called passion jobs are more challenging to come by, according to Amy Binder, a sociologist at the University of California, San Diego, and the lead author of a 2015 paper about elite colleges “funneling” graduates into certain kinds of “prestigious” careers.

“For other sectors like tech it’s easier to get on the conveyor belt and fill these positions,” Dr. Binder said. “I graduated from Stanford in the ’80s, and even back then there was talk on campus about people selling out and going to investment banks, but those jobs are still getting filled. The self-incrimination hasn’t stopped the juggernaut.”

Dr. Binder said elite schools have long steered students toward certain “high-status” industries — the C.I.A. in the 1950s, finance and consulting in the aughts and tech today. It’s a “prestige system,” she said, that universities enable.

“As tech firms get more negative reviews in the media and it becomes clear what their political toll can be, students may have more circumspection about taking these jobs,” she said. “At the same time, they’ll continue taking these jobs because of the security and reputation that comes with them. And universities will keep sponsoring all this recruitment.”

For years, students were told they could tackle ethical concerns about technology from the inside, working within the mammoth structures of companies like Google. Ms. Stapleton said that was part of the company’s allure: its ostensible commitment to empowering even its youngest employees to weigh in on critical problems.

She spent 12 years at Google and YouTube on various teams, including internal communications, where she wrote company talking points. Her weekly emails to staff, she said, were the stuff of corporate legend. At a 2012 all-hands, Larry Page, one of the company’s founders, called her onstage to celebrate her work as colleagues presented her with a wooden plaque that read: “The Bard of Google.”

Then, in 2018, Ms. Stapleton helped organize a Google walkout, after reporting in The New York Times revealed that the company gave a $90 million severance package to the Android creator Andy Rubin, who was accused of sexual misconduct.

Twenty-thousand workers left their desks in protest. Within six months, Ms. Stapleton said, she was demoted and pushed to resign. In December, she wrote about her experience in an essay for Elle.

Google maintained that Ms. Stapleton was not sidelined for her role in the walkout. “We thank Claire for her work at Google and wish her all the best,” a Google spokesperson responded. “To reiterate, we don’t tolerate retaliation. Our employee relations team did a thorough investigation of her claims and found no evidence of retaliation. They found that Claire’s management team supported her contributions to our workplace, including awarding her their team Culture Award for her role in the Walkout.”

But Ms. Stapleton said her story should give bright-eyed students pause about whether Big Tech and altruism are aligned.

“I don’t know if Google can credibly sell young people on the promise of doing good in the world anymore,” she said. “That’s not to say there aren’t wonderful people there and interesting things to work on. But if you care about a company’s values, ethics and contributions to society, you should take your talents elsewhere.”

Mr. Miley, who left Google in 2019, echoed her sentiment: “It’s hard to change a system from within when the system doesn’t think it needs to be changed.”

A spokeswoman for Google said the company continues to see job application numbers grow annually, and noted that the practice of having employees raise concerns about policies, whether on data privacy or human rights reviews, is part of the corporate culture.

The outside attention those concerns may draw is a reflection of Google’s growth and evolution from a search company to a larger entity with many products and services, the spokeswoman said.

But even companies with a market cap of over $970 billion (Google’s parent company, Alphabet) or over $614 billion (Facebook) aren’t immune to the punches of potential talent. John Sullivan, a professor of management at San Francisco State University who also advises companies on recruitment, estimated that criticisms of Uber’s sexual harassment and discrimination policies cost the company roughly $100 million, largely because of talent lost to competitors.

Sarah Soule, a professor and senior associate dean at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, said in an email that there is a long history of students protesting questionable corporate ethics, with several cases of protest directed toward recruiters, yielding powerful effects.

Take the case of Dow Chemical Company, which in 1965 accepted a $5 million Department of Defense contract to manufacture the flammable gel napalm during the Vietnam War. When recruiters turned up at New York University, they were met with hundreds of angry student demonstrators, The Times reported.

Brendon Sexton, the student government president at N.Y.U. at the time, demanded a moratorium on Dow’s campus recruitment efforts in 1968. “They don’t care that a sin is being committed here,” he told protesters near the job interview site.

Public pressure continued to mount, fueled largely by young activists. The company halted its production of napalm a year later.

Ms. Geiduschek said the behavior of tech companies is especially difficult to challenge because their products are ubiquitous.

“It’s hard to avoid spending your money at Amazon. I sometimes do it, especially in that Christmas-season binge,” she said. “If you want to sway this company to do the right thing, you have to attack it at places that are higher leverage, where it hurts.”

Categories
Car Services and Livery Cabs Car-Pooling and Ride-Sharing Design Flying Cars Hyundai Motor Co International Consumer Electronics Show Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized

Where’s Your Flying Car? Hyundai and Uber Say They’re Working on It

Curtiss Autoplane. Fulton Airphibian. Taylor Aerocar.

Businesses and entrepreneurs have been promising a mass-produced flying car for more than a century. None have succeeded, but that hasn’t stopped Hyundai and Uber from wanting in on the action.

In Las Vegas on Monday, at the Consumer Electronics Show, the two companies announced that they were joining forces to develop an all-electric air taxi that would be part of a future “aerial ride-share network.”

“We’re looking at the dawn of a completely new era that opens the skies above our cities,” Jaiwon Shin, the head of Hyundai’s Urban Air Mobility division, said at the announcement. “We will be able to fly on demand — just imagine that.”

The South Korean automaker showed a small-scale model on Monday and offered a virtual-reality experience. A nonfunctioning full-scale model was later on display.

The public has long been disappointed by promises of flying cars, but hopes have nevertheless been mounting that an aerial taxi could become a reality.

Analysts with Morgan Stanley have said they expect urban air taxis to be common by 2040, with the global market expected to be between $1.4 trillion and $2.9 trillion in size by then. At least 20 companies are working to that end, including start-ups, the aircraft manufacturers Boeing and Airbus, and automakers like Toyota and Porsche.

Daniel Wiegand, a founder of Lilium, one of the most promising and secretive start-ups in the field, told The New York Times recently that within five years a fleet of his company’s vehicles could be ferrying passengers between Manhattan and Kennedy International Airport.

But a number of challenges await. Building an air taxi that is quiet, safe and economical will mean overcoming several engineering and technical hurdles. Battery technology is limited, and the cost of operation and maintenance needs to be low enough to make rides commercially viable.

And then there is a long road to regulatory approval. According to Morgan Stanley, air taxis will probably be used first in package delivery, which has fewer technical and regulatory barriers.

In its Monday announcement, Hyundai said it would be able to bring “automotive-scale manufacturing” to Uber Elevate, the company’s aerial ride-hailing division. Hyundai would help produce and deploy the aircraft while Uber would handle support, ground connections and the customer interface.

Hyundai’s concept car, the S-A1, is designed to cruise 1,000 to 2,000 feet above the ground at 180 miles per hour. It would take trips up to 60 miles and seat four passengers and a pilot, though the aircraft would eventually be capable of autonomous flight.

During peak hours, the S-A1 would take about five to seven minutes to recharge, Hyundai said. Multiple rotors would allow for vertical takeoff and landing and be quieter than large-rotor helicopters with combustion engines — a feature critical to its use in cities, according to the company.

Uber has said it plans to host flight demonstrations this year and make its service commercially available in 2023. In addition to Hyundai, its partners include the Boeing subsidiary Aurora Flight Sciences, Bell, Embraer, Joby Aviation and several real estate companies. It has also signed agreements with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to develop ideas related to the infrastructure and technology of a crewless aerial network.

Categories
California Freelancing, Self-Employment and Independent Contracting Labor and Jobs Law and Legislation Layoffs and Job Reductions Lyft Inc National Press Photographers Assn Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized Vox Media Inc

California Wanted to Protect Uber Drivers. Now It May Hurt Freelancers.

SAN FRANCISCO — Gloria Rivera likes the freedom of freelance.

She moved to San Diego from Peru in 2005 and has a bustling career as an interpreter and translator for doctors, courts and conferences.

Now, as a new California law governing freelancers is set to take effect on Wednesday, her clients are wary. They are asking for more paperwork. Some services are hitting pause on hiring Californians at all.

“Everyone’s scared in California,” Ms. Rivera, 42, said. “Who’s going to hire me as an employee for three assignments a month?”

The new law, Assembly Bill 5, will radically reshape freelance work in California. Prompted in part by frustration with the treatment of workers by companies like the ride-hailing behemoths Uber and Lyft, the bill was created to extend workplace legal protections to roughly one million people in the state.

On Monday, Uber and Postmates filed a lawsuit in federal court in California seeking to block the law from being enforced against them. But the suit is unlikely to stop the law from going into effect in other professions.

Those other industries include a wide variety of freelance workers, such as writers, translators, strippers and clergy. Many said they were now discovering that the law could make earning a living much more difficult.

The idea behind the law, signed in September, is that many workers are misclassified as contractors so companies can save money. Unlike contractors, employees are protected by minimum-wage and overtime rules and are entitled to workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance. Their employers pay half their payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.

A.B. 5 codified and extended the reach of a 2018 State Supreme Court ruling that said workers must be classified as employees if the work they did was a regular part of the company’s business. Under the ruling, a plumber who fixes a leak at a store may be a legitimate contractor. But workers who sew dresses at home using cloth and patterns provided by the manufacturer are likely to be employees.

The new law also means a company must treat workers as employees if it controls how they do their work, or if the workers don’t run independent businesses in the same line of work that they do for the company. A plumber who worked only at the store would most likely be deemed an employee.

The law has a host of so-called carve-outs. It exempts certain white-collar workers like doctors and accountants, but it extends legal protections to tens of thousands of low-paid workers in fields like construction, janitorial services and hairstyling.

But complexities cropped up quickly. For example, marketers and grant writers were exempted, but journalists were not.

So a weekly columnist for a newspaper must now be considered an employee, since under the new law a freelance writer can publish only 35 so-called submissions a year with a publication. (A video and a text article on the same event would count as one.) The intention was to require newspapers to put these workers on staff. The result in some cases has been layoffs.

Vox Media cut more than 200 California freelancers, citing the new law. The transcription service Rev told its freelancers that it would be leaving California.

Emma Gallegos, 34, has been freelancing while saving money to start a local news website, Hwy 99, covering her hometown, Bakersfield, located in California’s agricultural heartland. She recently took a copy-editing test to get a significant contract that would help pay her bills. Afterward, the potential client emailed her, apologizing and explaining that it would not be able to hire her because she lived in California.

“There aren’t many full-time writing jobs in Bakersfield, so these kinds of remote editing contracts are important for me,” said Ms. Gallegos. “I just feel really frustrated and like I’m getting set back from my goals.”

Proponents of the new law argue that many companies are playing on worker anxieties and that many of the arrangements that employers are abandoning were illegal even before A.B. 5.

“A lot of these employers are sending out these fear-mongering emails,” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, the bill’s author. “I guess in this day and age of Twitter, that’s an easy thing to do — create a kind of mass hysteria.”

Ms. Gonzalez, a progressive Democrat, has in recent weeks become a fierce Twitter presence pushing back at critics, sometimes with profanity.

When asked about some of Ms. Gonzalez’s tweets, a spokeswoman said by email: “The assemblywoman is incredibly angry at an economic system that has caused a permanent underclass in her community of working men and women who are constantly being squeezed by corporate greed.”

Ms. Gonzalez has said the problems facing companies that rely on freelancers preceded the new law.

SB Nation, the sports website owned by Vox Media, which cited A.B. 5 as the reason it recently let go about 200 freelancers, was already sued by freelancers before the law changed. In one lawsuit, freelancers claimed that they worked as many as 40 hours a week but earned less than $150 a month.

A spokeswoman for Vox Media declined to comment but cited a post from SB Nation’s executive director in which he said the change was also “part of a business and staffing strategy that we have been exploring over the past two years.”

Even in situations where the new law might hurt workers, Ms. Gonzalez said, the reality is more nuanced than opponents let on. She pointed out that some media outlets, including SB Nation and The Los Angeles Times, were hiring more employees because of the new law.

While acknowledging concerns among journalists, Ms. Gonzalez attributed the media angst over the law partly to journalistic ethics: Those who lose their jobs feel free to complain loudly. But those who may benefit from the law by becoming employees, she said, “think it’s not appropriate to be engaged in something that affects them, that they have a conflict.”

Some freelancers said the new law would force them to change the way they worked. And some said they preferred or needed their flexible schedules. Many companies limit their employees’ flexibility for practical reasons, though there is nothing that requires them to impose a rigid schedule.

Nancy Depper, a copy editor and proofreader in Oakland, has multiple sclerosis. So “setting my own hours makes life infinitely better for all the reasons,” she said. She said she had lost a set of contracts for 2020 worth $120,000.

“I’ve barely had time to process the information,” Ms. Depper, 53, said. “I don’t know what my options are going forward.”

The National Press Photographers Association, which represents photographers who could lose freelance work because of the law, has filed a lawsuit challenging A.B. 5.

“Photographers and writers are stuck between the rock of dwindling to nonexistent employment opportunities and the hard place of A.B. 5,” said Mickey H. Osterreicher, general counsel for the association.

The politics of the bill were messy. There was significant support on the left for regulating Uber and Lyft, which use incentives to encourage drivers to work when and where the companies need them while avoiding any of the protections offered by employment. Ms. Gonzalez focused partly on those companies.

But many of those who could end up losing freelance work consider themselves progressives, so it has been confusing to find themselves disagreeing with a progressive lawmaker over a union-backed law.

Vanessa McGrady, a writer in Los Angeles who runs a feminist clothing brand, planned to volunteer for Senator Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign next year. But then Ms. Warren endorsed A.B. 5. Now Ms. McGrady, who is anxious about how the law will affect her career, is conflicted.

“I feel so strongly that workers need protection,” Ms. McGrady said. “But this bill is killing cockroaches with a cannon.”

Strip-club owners up in arms about the law’s effect on their industry may have little recourse because courts have found that many clubs misclassified dancers even under older rules in a number of states. But freelance strippers in California who earn money from streaming services that pipe their performances onto customers’ computers and mobile devices may now find that these online platforms refuse to work with them for fear of being held in violation of the law.

Steve Smith, a spokesman for the California Labor Federation, which advised lawmakers on A.B. 5, conceded that the law was somewhat ambiguous in this area and that the State Legislature should clarify issues like this in the coming years.

“There are going to be unintended consequences with a law like this,” he said. “We want to do everything we can to make sure we’re addressing the right problems and not having any adverse effects on workers.”

Nellie Bowles reported from San Francisco and Noam Scheiber from Evanston, Ill. Marc Tracy contributed reporting from New York.

Categories
California Car Services and Livery Cabs Delivery Services Freelancing, Self-Employment and Independent Contracting Labor and Jobs Law and Legislation Lyft Inc Mobile Applications Postmates Inc Suits and Litigation (Civil) Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized Wages and Salaries

Uber and Postmates File Suit to Block California Freelancer Law

Uber and Postmates filed a lawsuit in federal court in California on Monday, seeking an injunction to prevent the state’s landmark freelancer law from taking effect against them on Jan. 1 as scheduled.

The action underlines how high the stakes are for Uber and Postmates with the new California law, called Assembly Bill 5. The law could potentially threaten their businesses because under it, workers must be classified as employees rather than contractors under certain conditions, such as if a company controls how they do their work or if the work is a regular part of the company’s business.

Most employment experts have said the new law will require Uber and its rival, Lyft, along with delivery services like Postmates, to classify their drivers in California as employees. That could add 20 to 30 percent to Uber’s and Lyft’s labor costs and lead to many hundreds of millions of dollars in additional expenses a year, if not more.

As employees, drivers would be protected by minimum wage and overtime rules and would be eligible for workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance. The companies would have to pay half of their payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security.

Postmates said it was seeking to delay the law from taking effect to gain time to figure out a compromise so that its workers would not be classified as full-time employees. Postmates and Uber argued in their complaint that California’s State Legislature had exempted certain industries while denying an exemption to what are known as “gig work” companies on essentially irrational grounds.

The suit is unlikely to stop the law from taking effect against workers outside the gig companies. A federal judge will decide whether to grant a preliminary injunction blocking the law from being enforced against the gig companies, which could later turn into a permanent injunction.

Uber said in a statement that it was bringing a legal challenge against the new law “on the basis of lack of equal protection and due process under both federal and state law.” The ride-hailing company declined to comment further.

Postmates said, “This lawsuit is an effort to preserve on-demand work opportunities,” added that it was urging state lawmakers, organized labor and Gov. Gavin Newsom to negotiate a compromise.

But Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, the bill’s author, said in a statement that “Uber is in court bizarrely trying to say A.B. 5 is unconstitutional.” She added, “The one clear thing we know about Uber is they will do anything to try to exempt themselves from state regulations that make us all safer and their driver employees self-sufficient.”

Uber and Lyft both said in documents they filed in anticipation of their public offerings in 2019 that having to classify drivers as employees could significantly hurt their financial performance. Both companies’ stocks have dropped since they went public this year.

California legislators passed the new law in September and it was signed into law. Uber, one of the main targets of the legislation, had previously declared that it did not plan to reclassify its drivers as employees and that it thought its drivers could retain their independent status even under the new law. Uber and Lyft have both also announced that they would each kick in $30 million for a state ballot initiative to essentially exempt their drivers from the new law.

In addition to Uber and Postmates, two workers — one who drives using Uber and another who delivers food through the Postmates app — also joined the lawsuit.

Categories
Car Services and Livery Cabs Computers and the Internet Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Fowler, Susan J Kalanick, Travis Khosrowshahi, Dara Sexual Harassment Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized Workplace Hazards and Violations

Uber Settles Federal Investigation Into Workplace Culture

SAN FRANCISCO — In 2017, a former Uber employee wrote a public essay describing how the ride-hailing company had permitted sexual harassment to fester at the workplace.

The revelations led to an outcry over Uber’s toxic culture. Federal authorities and others began investigations into the company. More than 20 employees were later fired over their part in the behavior. And the disclosures raised questions about Uber’s growth-at-all-costs mentality, resulting in the ouster of Travis Kalanick, a co-founder and then the chief executive.

On Wednesday, Uber resolved one investigation into its workplace culture. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which has been examining the company since 2017, said it had “found reasonable cause to believe that Uber permitted a culture of sexual harassment and retaliation against individuals who complained about such harassment.”

Uber said it had agreed to a settlement with the agency by establishing a $4.4 million fund to pay current and former employees who were sexually harassed at work. It also agreed to three years of monitoring by a former agency commissioner to ensure that it changes its practices.

“This agreement will hopefully empower women in technology to speak up against sexism in the workplace knowing that their voices can yield meaningful change,” ƒe said in a statement.

Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer, said the company had “worked hard to ensure that all employees can thrive at Uber by putting fairness and accountability at the heart of who we are and what we do” and was working with the commission to improve those efforts.

The settlement showed how Uber was addressing the repercussions of its internal conduct more than two years after the envelope-pushing behavior of its executives and employees first came to light.

The company remains under investigation by the Justice Department over a tool it created to help it evade scrutiny by law enforcement authorities. It is also the subject of a consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission over its privacy practices until 2038. Last month, the authorities in London said they would not extend the company’s license to operate there because Uber did not meet the “fit and proper” standard needed to hold a taxi license.

Dara Khosrowshahi, the chief executive, pledged to turn around Uber when he joined the company in late 2017, saying that his motto was “do the right thing.” He then replaced much of the senior leadership, eliminated a mandatory arbitration provision for sexual assault and harassment claims against the company, and said that executive compensation would be tied to whether or not Uber reached its goals for hiring a more diverse staff.

Uber has also tried to be more transparent about its track record on safety and harassment. This month, it released its first report documenting the number of sexual assaults that occurred in the United States during Uber rides. Uber said it had counted 3,045 sexual assaults in 2018, which it said represented a small fraction of its rides.

Uber’s workplace culture first became an issue in February 2017 when a former engineer, Susan Fowler, detailed how her complaints about sexual harassment at the company were brushed aside because the man who had harassed her was considered a high performer. Ms. Fowler now works as an editor at The New York Times.

“The tech industry, among others, has often ignored allegations of sexual harassment when an accused harasser is seen as more valuable to the company than the accuser,” said William Tamayo, the San Francisco district director of the employment commission.

In the aftermath, Mr. Kalanick faced scrutiny for putting growth ahead of how Uber’s employees were treated. Uber was also found to have engaged in other dubious tactics to protect its business, including using data collected from its app and other techniques to identify and sidestep law enforcement, a scheme known as “Greyball.”

As part of the settlement announced on Wednesday, Uber employees who worked at the company after January 2014 will be eligible to submit claims to the commission.

Uber said it would also develop tools to help it respond proactively to harassment accusations. The company said it would begin identifying employees who have been the subject of more than one harassment complaint, and identify managers who don’t respond quickly when their employees raise complaints of harassment.

A spokeswoman for the commission said it was pleased with the $4.4 million settlement, which is a tiny amount for Uber. The company’s revenue totaled $3.8 billion in its most recent quarter. In October, Intel paid $5 million as part of a settlement with the Labor Department over allegations of pay discrimination.

Categories
Car Services and Livery Cabs Computers and the Internet Delivery Services India Initial Public Offerings Khosrowshahi, Dara Mergers, Acquisitions and Divestitures Start-ups Uber Eats Uber Technologies Inc Uncategorized Zomato Media Pvt Ltd

Uber in Talks to Sell Its Food-Delivery Business in India

SAN FRANCISCO — Uber is in advanced discussions to sell its food-delivery business in India, according to two people with knowledge of the plans, as the company moves to stem its losses.

The ride-hailing company is nearing a deal to sell its Uber Eats service in India to Zomato, an Indian food-delivery service, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to do so publicly. The sale could be announced as early as this week, they said.

A spokesman for Uber declined to comment. The talks were earlier reported by TechCrunch, which said a deal would value the India business of Uber Eats at $400 million.

Dara Khosrowshahi, Uber’s chief executive, has been trying to pare back money-losing businesses to prove to investors that the company can turn a profit. Investors have agitated both in public and behind the scenes for Uber to clean up its balance sheet since it went public earlier this year.

Uber’s initial public offering in May was a disappointment, with the company’s shares immediately plunging as investors questioned how much money the ride-hailing service loses. That event marked a turn in sentiment around high-profile-but-unprofitable tech start-ups, many of which had burned cash for years in the pursuit of growth. WeWork, another highly valued start-up, later shelved its plans for an I.P.O. as private investors cut the company’s valuation to a fraction of its former worth.

Investors have recently homed in on several issues at Uber, according to two people briefed on the conversations. Those include continued regulatory challenges around the world — most recently, transportation authorities said they would not extend Uber’s taxi license in London, one of its biggest markets — and ballooning expenditures.

Some investors have privately grumbled that Uber also paid too much for Careem, a Dubai-based ride-hailing and delivery company that Uber announced this spring it would acquire for $3.1 billion.

According to two people familiar with the matter, investors have also privately complained to Mr. Khosrowshahi about the expense of its Advanced Technologies Group, which develops self-driving vehicles. No decisions have been made about the unit, these people said, which has more than 1,000 full-time employees.

While Uber Eats has been a bright spot for revenue growth, the company has offered subsidies and free promotional offerings to gain new users, which has been expensive. In a conference call with investors last month, Mr. Khosrowshahi said his plan for Uber Eats was to take first or second place in every city it operates.

“If we can’t make it to that level, we’ll look to dispose or we’ll get out of the market,” he said at the time.

In India particularly, Uber Eats has struggled to sign up restaurants, diners and delivery agents in a brutally competitive market where Zomato and other delivery start-ups like Swiggy are well established. Uber has had to offer heavy incentives to lure customers there.

In September, Uber also announced that it was pulling its Eats business out of South Korea, where the company faced stiff competition from local start-ups.

Mr. Khosrowshahi has previously retreated in ride-hailing in Southeast Asia, where the company faces difficulties competing. In 2017, under then-chief executive Travis Kalanick, Uber pulled out of China, where the company was burning billions of dollars. That same year, Uber largely withdrew from Russia.

Mike Isaac reported from San Francisco and Katie Benner from Washington. Vindu Goel contributed reporting from India.