As a government, the hardest thing to do is to maintain balance. From balancing budgets, to balancing freedom and security, it always seems that the most difficulties come from decisions requiring important choices. This was seen recently with Uber. The ride share company has faced dozens of lawsuits and is no stranger to opposition towards their method of operating. The largest opponents have been the taxi industry, and on September 22, 2017, they were handed a heavy loss, as the city of London banned Uber from operating (BBC, 2017).

Since the inception of Uber many questions have arisen around it’s safety. There have been multiple reports in numerous countries of assault from Uber passengers. In 2015, Uber was banned from New Delhi after a driver raped a customer (BBC, 2017). Moreover, Uber has had a myriad of PR nightmares this year, with both upper management and employees. Sam Levin (2017) reported that Uber was involved in a sexism scandal with a hiring manger after the latter declared that “sexism is systematic in the tech industry”. Despite all the scandals, Uber has over 3 million users and 40’000 drivers in London (BBC,2017), many of which were angered by the fact that the local government acted against Uber.

The decision to end Uber’s license in London was a difficult one. Despite Uber’s innovative system that provides an incredibly affordable alternative to taxi services, it is also a disorganised, mismanaged corporation. Last October, a British tribunal declared that Uber drivers were not self-employed, but rather they were employees of Uber (BBC, 2016). Uber was now directly responsible for the conduct of their “employees”. The local government realized that Uber saw their employees as individual businesses and that they had a freelance attitude towards those businesses. The government determined that Uber was acting irresponsibly by treating them this way. They had to find a balance. A balance between the capitalist side of freedom of businesses to operate, but also the responsibility of citizens safety. Certain liberties must be restricted for the public to be safe, and Uber faced the full effects of this decision. Despite that fact that most users were not happy, as the taxi service is expensive, this decision is ultimately for the greater good.

The main issue with Uber is that there are many grey areas in their industry which offer them legal leeway and little accountability. However, there is a lot of hope for Uber to exist in major cities. For that to happen, many jurisdictional and legal changes must occur, things Uber cannot directly change themselves. Perhaps that is the most frustrating thing to consumers, the fact that there is little they can do.

Word count: 445

References:
Levin, S. (2017, March 24). Uber manager told female engineer that ‘sexism is systemic in tech’. Retrieved September 26, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/24/uber-manager-sexism-systemic-tech-kamilah-taylor
Uber London loses licence to operate. (2017, September 22). Retrieved September 26, 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-41358640
Johnston, C. (2016, October 28). Uber drivers win key employment case. Retrieved September 26, 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37802386