POINT: Uber surge pricing is a justice issue

Some Uber users rang in the new year with a surprise in their bank statements — the worst of which totaled more than $1,000 in charges. The pricey Uber rides came as a result of what regular users know as “surge pricing,” during which time Uber increases prices to meet a heightened demand — a decision the company claims incentivizes more drivers.

But these $1,000-plus New Year’s Eve charges were well outside of the norm. Whereas most Uber users are familiar with the occasional surge prices ranging from two to three times the normal rate, New Year’s Eve passengers saw prices go as high as nine times the usual amount. Though Uber excused its surge pricing as a result of supply and demand, this defense fails to address Uber’s sordid history of price-gouging — particularly when customers’ safety should be the first priority.

“Higher prices are required in order to get cars on the road and keep them on the road during the busiest times,” Uber founder and CEO Travis Kalanick wrote in response to complaints. “In short, without surge pricing, there would be no car available at all.”

But hiking up prices on New Year’s Eve doesn’t send a message of supply and demand. Rather, it implies that Uber, as a company committed to increasing accessibility, is merely taking advantage of its users on a night in which getting home safely and affordably is paramount.

This wouldn’t be the first time Uber has crossed the line with its surge pricing. In 2014, the company faced humiliating backlash after it charged users up to four times more in Sydney, Australia, following a hostage crisis. Those seeking to distance themselves from the downtown siege were faced with a minimum $100 charge — a fare hike Uber said it implemented with the crisis in mind in order to “encourage more drivers to come online and pick up passengers in the area,” according to the company’s Twitter page.

But taking advantage of customers in situations that warrant heightened safety isn’t only immoral — it’s bad business. Though heightened prices might compel more drivers to work in the short-term, there’s no guarantee that such practices can maintain customer loyalty in the long-term. In fact, a 2015 study by Northeastern University found that surge pricing doesn’t always work in Uber’s favor, prompting would-be customers to either wait until the surge expires or make alternative travel plans. This also does no favors to Uber drivers, especially those who prefer to rely on a steady rate to make a living instead of simply chasing the occasional surge from city to city.

Though there are government-led initiatives to cap excessive surge pricing — an especially necessary move during emergency situations or natural disasters — Uber can and must take action to benefit its employees and customers alike. The company should implement an automatic fare estimate for all rides — a feature that, although it already exists within the app, could be more easily accessible. The app could also do more to expand Uber Pool, a feature that allows users to split rides with others going in the same direction.

But perhaps the simplest solution to this issue would be for Uber to get rid of its surge pricing tactics altogether. By moderately increasing the normal rate across the board, Uber can give its drivers the peace of mind to rely on a steady rate without chasing occasional surges and can also maintain customer trust — particularly during times when consumers need the service most.

Regardless of other forms of transportation that users can rely on, Uber has a responsibility to provide a fair and trustworthy service to its customers without fear of price-gouging or being taken advantage of in a dangerous situation. Unless Uber is ready to put the needs of its valued customers first, perhaps it’s time we find another Lyft.

Yasmeen Serhan is a senior majoring in international relations. “Point/Counterpoint” runs  Tuesdays.