Over the weekend, protesters angry over President Trump’s executive order on immigration turned their ire on ride-sharing company Uber. But the #BoycottUber movement that took over social media may have been about much more than the company’s weak response to the President.
Protesters claimed that Uber was “profiteering” off their activism, picking up stranded passengers at JFK in New York, as New York taxi drivers refused to take airport fares. And when confronted, protesters say Uber’s CEO, Travis Kalanick, refused to condemn the executive order; Kalanick said in a statement that he’d “bring up the issue” in the next meeting of Donald Trump’s tech council.
Business experts say that Uber has been poised for a consumer backlash for some time, however, and political watchers note that angry leftists have been looking for an opportunity to punish the company for its political leanings.
Uber has been dealing with a “backlog of ill will,” built up as users rebel against surge pricing that drives up the cost of using ride-sharing during times of need, and ride cancelations, as Uber drivers are given more flexibility in what fares they can take, according to startup journalist Eric Newcomer.
Even Uber’s recent logo change and continuous update cycle have irked app users; some have even claimed recent app changes now hide how Uber changes what they charge during the company’s rate surges.
And then there’s Uber’s response to past Trump protests. During the Women’s Marches in LA and DC, Uber triggered surge pricing, and took advantage of weary women’s rights agitators, who apparently thought the company should give them low-cost rides based on the philanthropic nature of their activity.
The weekend’s airport immigration actions may have been a way of working out much of that frustration.
Also relevant: Cab companies have been pushing city and state governments to regulate ride-sharing apps like Uber and Lyft, which that are cutting into their bottom lines and circumventing burdensome taxi regulations and driver union dictates. Uber’s CEO is part of Trump’s economic advisory team largely because he’s been successful in promoting an economy that exists outside of government oversight—and taxi companies fear that might have national consequences.
So when Uber picked up fares unionized New York cab drivers wouldn’t—over immigration concerns that seem tangential to the union’s core purpose of collective bargaining—it was the perfect time to foment widespread unrest with Uber.
Uber’s competitor, Lyft, at least, had a good weekend, escaping the anger by donating $1 million to the ACLU immediately upon learning that Uber was merely considering its approach to the executive order.
