| Description |
1 online resource |
| Series |
SAGE Business Cases |
|
SAGE Business Cases
|
| Summary |
Since Uber's founding in 2009, individuals associated with Uber have engaged in (or been accused of engaging in) numerous categories of corporate malfeasance: failure to protect data privacy, theft of trade secrets, sexual misconduct (including sexual assault and sexual harassment), lack of worker safety, lack of consumer safety, and racial discrimination. Thus, Uber is a good test case for the question of whether corporate behavior can provide moral justification for a boycott. More specifically, an examination of the 2017 #deleteUber controversy will invite the reader to consider questions such as the following: When is a personal boycott morally justified, and when (if ever) is a personal boycott morally obligatory? How are personal boycotts related to larger scale organized boycotts? What are the factors that make an organized boycott morally justified (or unjustified)? Is there a sound argument for the conclusion that we should #deleteUber? |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Notes |
Description based on XML content |
| Subject |
Uber (Firm) -- Case studies
|
| SUBJECT |
Uber (Firm) fast (OCoLC)fst01995122 |
| Subject |
Boycotts -- Moral and ethical aspects -- Case studies
|
|
Ridesharing -- Management -- Case studies
|
|
Ridesharing -- Management.
|
| Genre/Form |
Case studies.
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| ISBN |
9781529741766 |
|
1529741769 |
|
