Uber Business Practices

Uber Business Practices
Name:
Institution:
Uber Business Practices
The Corporate Social Responsibility is the initiatives that are put in place by the corporations with the intention of not only assessing but also taking responsibilities regarding their influence on social and environmental well-being (Preuss, 2013). In most of the cases, Uber has been blamed for undermining the essence of the corporate social responsibility. It is because it has been linked with various controversies that include using technology to evade regulations and authorities. Other contentions are listing their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees and handling the finances from the investors to eliminate competition (Wolsen, 2014, July 8). Therefore, it can be argued that Uber is making right the concept of the utilitarian ethics to ensure that they survive regardless of the cost.
The principal Uber shareholders include the drivers, the users, and the investors. Uber Company survives by eliminating competition and providing a platform where drivers can access clients more conveniently. However, Uber is becoming more suitable for both the drivers and clients. As for the drivers, Uber provides a platform that makes their work more flexible. On the other side, Uber provides the client with cheap and reliable transportation services. From the utility test, the shareholders that benefit from the strategy of using the investors’ money as a means of keeping the prices low are the clients.

Moreover, the shareholders that are harmed by the same strategy are the investors. However, by the help of the utility test, the badness of the Uber’s strategy outweigh its goodness. It is because from the approach the number of the people benefiting from it exceed those affected by it. Only the investors experience adverse effects of the strategy while thousands of drivers and millions of the clients being the beneficiaries.
Besides, the only shareholders who benefit from the Uber’s policy of classifying drivers as independent contractors as opposed to employees are the investors. The classification ensures that the Uber Company avoids costs such as taxes, operation costs, and employment-related protections (Frazier, 2016, October 14). It means the money that was supposed to be spent on this cost will end up in the pockets of the investors at the expense of the independent drivers. Moreover, from the utility test, it can be argued that the policy’s good outweighs its bad aspect. It is because the business world is all about capitalism. Therefore, it is acceptable to accumulate profit and survive in the business at the expense of the rest.
Moreover, the Uber’s strategy of evading authorities with the help of the advanced software benefits only the drivers but harm the clients. Evading the authorities means that Uber drivers can operate illegally without paying taxes and meeting other legal requirements of the regions where they work (Isaac, 2017, March 3). Since all of these conditions need to be catered for by the drivers, evading taxes translate to drivers pocketing more money. On the other side, the clients are harmed by being denied the opportunity of enjoying the improved social amenities and infrastructures from the evaded taxes. From the utility test, it is apparent that the harm of this Uber’s strategy outweighs the good. The approach only benefits a small fraction of the society at the expense of the more significant society. Helping the drivers to evade taxes and other requirements at the cost of the more prominent population in the community is unethical. The evaded taxes could have been used to improve the society for the benefit of all the people.
References
Frazier, R. (2016, October 14). Sharing is caring: Are Uber, Lyft driver’s independent contractors.
HR Hero Line. Retrieved from: http://www.hrhero.com/hl/articles/2016/10/14/sharing-is-caring-are-uber-lyft-drivers-independent-contractors-2/
Isaac, M. (2017, March 3). How Uber deceives the authorities worldwide. New York Times.
Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/technology/uber-grey ball-program-evade-authorities.html
Wolsen, M. (2014, July 8). Uber’s brilliant strategy to make it too big to ban. Wired. Retrieved
from: https://www.wired.com/2014/07/ubers-brilliant-strategy-to-make-itself-too-big-to-ban/
Preuss, L. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility. Encyclopedia of Corporate Social
Responsibility, 3(3), 579-587.