Business Ethics (Uber)        

Business Ethics (Uber)

Background Information

Uber companies are involved in the transportation of people across the United States and other countries. The most critical issue in as far as shipping is concerned is efficiency and time frame. Laws and recommendations depicted by different authoritative individuals, however, can sabotage the issue of transportation sector meeting customer needs. The real problem is, however, not the outcome of the laws and, but the claim itself. What can a single law that governs the uber industry have on the existence of a transport sector? The application that Uber companies should not run a check on their drivers before allowing them to carry passengers is one of them (Piantavini et al.). Uber drivers are the ones who work for uber companies, driving clients from one place to another. The claim has to be critically analyzed, including the advantages and disadvantages involved in each side of the coin.

Claim

The claim states that ‘It is not permissible for Uber companies in the United States to not perform an effective and through check on its drivers before approving them.

Explanation of the claim

It is not permissible for Uber companies in the United States to not perform an effective and thorough check on its drivers. The statement based on the uber industry means that it is not recommended or required that the Uber companies hire their drivers without performing a thorough check on them. It means that the likeliness of any driver who had had a criminal history not getting a chance to be hired, because a thorough check will mean that even the latest and the oldest criminal offence is brought to the table. Contrary, we can as well go against the statement by giving Uber companies a go ahead to hire its drivers without necessarily performing any security check on them.As far as the profile of any person is concerned, there are always some critical issues that are involved. One of the problems is criminal records and offense. Taking into consideration this claim, the uber companies will be forced to hire drivers without taking into account their criminal records or profiles. Running a scan on someone means that you have to cover all aspects of that person, including where he or she comes from, the personal details as well as the criminal records. The opposite of the claim, however, means that for the Uber companies to be able to hire or allow their drivers into the business process, they will have to carry out lots of security and personal scan on the person (Piantavini et al.). Based on the fact that the uber business is a technological platform, we expect that all the drivers’ information is stored together with their Taxi number so that the data of one person is not confused with the other.

Reasons for the Claim

1. The idea of running a scan on new Uber drivers can be seen as the best idea to curb incidences of crime and violence. According to the Los Angeles Times, Uber companies had been accused of hiring drivers who were once criminals. They were accused of putting the lives of nearly 1 million individuals at risk. The claim, therefore, can be supported based on the security importance.
2. Some criminals may use the application as a means of entering into the Uber business only to commit a crime without being noticed. The security scan that will be done on these drivers will give clear profile information as well as any criminal record, allowing the uber companies to discard them accordingly. Imagine a situation where a suicide bomber is permitted into the Uber industry, as a driver. He or she can use that opportunity to commit the most terrible criminal offense ever. The loss and blame will have to be taken care of by the company which hired that person.

• Other incidences include a situation where criminals and terrorists take advantage of the open Uber driver application to kidnap innocent civilians for, intimidating the government to provide cash, lest they kill them. One significant thing about the existence of a better economic and human reality is the ability of all stakeholders to deal with criminals and violence. The work of crime prevention does not only involve the government but the entire stakeholders, Uber companies involved. Therefore, the idea of including a scan on the Uber drivers is one of the ways that can be used to prevent the incidences of criminal activities. Sometimes, however, a new entry into the Uber business as a driver cannot be identified as a criminal or not. Some people may have a clean criminal record but may be planning to do it once they gain access to the industry. It cannot be prevented because you may not be in a position to identify whose intention is what.

1. The scanning process can also help to identify the potentiality of a driver in delivering what is required by the company. For this reason, many of the companies can be able to have knowledge of who they are dealing with and to be able to prevent any uncertainties if they do exist.

Reasons against the Claim

1. We come from different aspects of the society. The way you will be viewed from one side of the United States is different from the way you can be perceived elsewhere. According to the claim, if the Uber companies decide that they will be running a security scan on their drivers, it will mean that others will have to be locked out of the system. The personal information of different drivers differs (Piantavini et al.). Some of the technologies that are used to run the driver’s security scan use fingerprint to store the driver’s information based on his or her history, meaning that the likeliness of leaving a skilled driver out is high.
2. The issue of involving a security scan on new Uber drivers may be disadvantageous to some. For example, if an experienced driver is seeking for a job and his criminal records show that he was once a criminal. He can be denied the chance of being a driver because of his criminal record. I do believe that people change and the fact that you were once a criminal does not mean that they cannot change. For this reason i may contrary disagree to the claim and give the past criminals a chance to redeem themselves.

• We should also consider some of the experience that we need from drivers. The idea of scanning Uber drivers before accepting them to work in a particular company may result into sending away the most prominent and skilled drivers ever, due to the criminal record, which can otherwise be irrelevant. That is the reasons as to why sometimes we have to ignore the history of a person and employ them based on what they can do.

1. Lastly, a criminal person will feel like he or she is not part of the community if the treatment she is getting even after accepting the consequences and taking responsibilities is not appreciated. Based on the idea that we should permit a thorough scan on a former criminal, chances of leaving a someone who was ready to redeem him or herself out is high. The may feel frustrated and end up being the worst criminals of all timwes.

                                                                         Decision

I am greatly persuaded that the reasons for section had the strongest arguments. Therefore, I agree with the claim’ It is not permissible for Uber companies in the United States to not perform an effective and through check on its drivers before approving them’. For this reason, the incidence of crime even though they cannot be eliminated entirely, they can be prevented to a manageable level. Any incident of crime recorded on a person should act as a stepping stone for the Uber companies to be able to distinguish between the good guys and the bad guys. Some of the reasons for the existing technologies that can show the criminal history of an individual needs to be updated so that the information on a particular driver can be obtained and accessed accordingly. As it goes, sometimes it is hard to trust someone whom you have an idea of his or her deeds. There were strong arguments as far as the claim is concerned. Starting from taking caution on criminal activities,

Rebuttals

Countering the reasons against the claim, it is important to consider some essential factors before opposing the claim entirely. First, running a security scan is the best unifying factor for all the drivers regardless of the different societies they emerge from which nullifies the claim that security scans will disadvantage some drivers from certain societal backgrounds. In addition, reputation and personal history is very important especially where security is concerned. Essentially, the people who use uber must not only be secured but they must also feel secured, that is, it might feel uncomfortable to know that the individual taking you to your destination was once a serial killer. Furthermore, skill does not define our ability, on the contrary, discipline totally defines our ability. Skilled drivers without good character will just cause more problems than good mannered drivers without vast skills. Lastly, regardless of whether the criminals will feel underrated in the society, uber must not be perceived by the society itself to be encouraging criminals and criminal activities. To maintain public reputation, uber must be seen at the frontline in terms of their fight against crime. Employing criminals is  a direct or an indirect way of encouraging crime and thus any driver with a criminal history should be locked out to discourage any other person who plans to engage in crime.