Be it travelling alone at night, wearing comfortable clothing or competing to have a say in higher positions, India’s patriarchal society, where men dominate homes, governments, corporations, businesses & other positions of power, creates an environment where women are inferior and unsafe.
And against this particular background, where the government is already struggling to find ways to increase safety for women, comes a corporate practice, a commercial idea that ‘markets’ safety, that creates a false sense of safety for a woman.
That idea is the sticker – “This Driver Respects Women” – that is shown on almost all the drivers’ vehicles working for ride-sharing platform operators like Uber & Ola. Here are three reasons why the sticker is a marketing ploy, a mere band-aid on a gaping wound.
#1 – Lack of Safety within the ecosystem:
In the way the ride-sharing platforms function & the ecosystem they create, five major safety concerns affect all female drivers.
How the Rideshare system works:
Knowing how the rideshare system works is essential to understanding the safety risks. Here’s an overview:
First, the user registers on the ride-sharing platform with a phone number, email ID and name. Once registered, the user can now book cabs from any place to any other place. They can choose which type of vehicle they want to use to travel – starting from a two-wheeler [the fare depends on the distance of travel, the traffic, the demand for the route, etc.]. Some rideshare platforms allow users to negotiate prices inside the platform by providing the users (& the drivers) the option to increase/decrease the fare. Once chosen, using the user’s location services, the rideshare platform connects the user to the interested & nearest driver of the selected vehicle type.
Drivers should also be registered with the ride-sharing platform. They are required to agree to terms imposed by the ridesharing business operators. This includes sharing the fare with the ride-sharing business operator, etc. Drivers who are part of the ride-sharing platform’s ecosystem can see the rides requested near their location and can ‘pick’ up jobs by accepting the ride offer from the riders via the platform.
Riders can see the details of the driver who accepted the request, the driver’s rating (given by other riders), and how far away the driver is from the user’s location. They can also contact the driver if needed. Some platforms provide the ability to call the driver within the rideshare application itself or through an intermediary number (a number alternative to the user’s personal phone number generated by the ridesharing operator). Some platforms do not particularly provide that feature.
Once the driver reaches the user’s location, the driver picks up the user and starts the journey with a one-time password that the user provides to begin the journey. Once the journey ends, the user can pay the driver in different ways – UPI (by scanning the driver’s code / by inputting the driver’s phone number connected to the driver’s bank account) or via the ride-sharing platform. Once the payment is complete, the user can rate the entire ride experience on the platform. The rating is reflected on the Driver’s profile. That rating is visible to the next rider who matches with that driver.
Firstly, because people cannot choose which specific driver they want to be driven by, it limits women’s agency and forces them to rely on the driver’s rating, which is not always accurate or indicative of their behaviour. Against this backdrop, the sticker, “This Driver Respects Women”, does not add any value other than to provide a false sense of security.
Secondly, the drivers registered on the platform are predominantly male. There’s an extremely low rate of women drivers on the platform. This means that riders, especially women, are stuck with the platform’s chosen male drivers throughout the trip. Even though some platforms (like Uber) allow women drivers to pick women riders, it is still a low number compared to the number of women who travel in cars driven by men.
Thirdly, some rideshare platforms’ inadequate protection of passenger anonymity exposes women to potential risks. Sharing the name with the driver when the ride is requested by the rider, having to share the personal phone number with the driver to contact the driver, having to open the chat feature (in the UPI payment platforms) to send money to the driver’s phone linked bank account, ends up creating an opportunity for unwanted contact, harassment, and even stalking. Several people face the trouble of drivers stalking them by calling them on their numbers or contacting them via the chat feature available on UPI payment platforms.
Fourthly, since many riders use ride-sharing platforms to commute to the office from home (& back), drivers can quickly learn a woman’s home and work addresses, along with her typical routines and movements. This knowledge increases the risk of targeted crimes such as stalking and harassment. This, coupled with the fact that a woman’s details are compromised, becomes a bigger problem for women.
Were you harassed? We are conducting a survey on this. You can participate here.
Fifthly, most metropolitan areas are familiar with the ride cancellation problem, wherein drivers call the rider and agree to provide the ride at a rate different from the one shown on the ride-sharing platform. This puts women who travel with such a driver outside the ambit of the ride-sharing platform. Legally, this becomes a “volenti non-fit injuria” situation.
“volenti non-fit injuria” means that if a person puts themselves in a situation where they could incur injury, and something happens to them, they can’t bring a claim against the people responsible for the injury.
This means that if a woman agrees to use the driver connected by the ride-sharing platform but enters into a deal outside the ride-sharing platform, she can’t bring a case against the ride-sharing platform for connecting her with the driver. This is based on sound logic, except that the person who has the most to lose is the woman who would not have cancelled the ride in the first place.
One can’t deny that these factors foster an environment of heightened risk and vulnerability for female passengers. It is extremely easy to stalk via these platforms. Against this backdrop, the “This Driver Respects Women” sticker requires women to gamble with their well-being based on a mere declaration.
#2 – No obligation on Ride-sharing platforms to educate drivers:
First and foremost, the “This Driver Respects Women” Sticker is a corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaign undertaken by companies like Indraprastha Gas Limited (they print the stickers and distribute them – they don’t particularly educate drivers about sensitivity). It’s also an initiative by NGOs (like the Manas Foundation), who are involved in undertaking sensitisation programs, albeit on a small scale.
The sticker is neither a policy endorsed fully by ride-sharing platforms like Uber / Ola nor a policy they refuse to support. They & the companies that write off the expenses for producing the stickers are the utmost beneficiaries of these measures in the grand scheme.
That is precisely where the role of ride-sharing platforms stops – beneficiaries of an action done by others – they don’t NEED to sensitise their drivers, as it is not their initiative; & they don’t NEED to take any proactive measures to protect women apart from what is required from a strategic point of view. Even if public consensus requires they MUST do something they are not required to do anything by the law.
This is because the law (The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal) Act, 2013) (POSH Act) doesn’t mandate training drivers who work on the Ride-share platforms.
The Act mandates the sensitisation of employees/contract workers (temporary workers) working under an employer. It doesn’t mandate sensitisation of the Independent contractors hired by the employer.
This is the difference between an employer-independent Contractor & employer-employee / employer-contract worker. Unlike the latter forms, in an employer-independent contractor relationship, the employer is only required and responsible for paying the Independent Contractor an agreed sum of money to complete the task. The employer is not responsible for the Independent Contractor, how the work is done & who they associate themselves with during the work, just as long as what was asked is done.
The recent judgement by the High Court of Karnataka also affirms this distinction between employee-independent contractors.1
In the case of ride-sharing platforms and drivers, the relationship is an employer-independent contractor one – the drivers, as long as they do what is necessary to be done, i.e. pick up and drop the passenger at the location, are paid. They can provide services on competitors’ platforms and choose whether, when, and where to offer them (Something that would not be possible if the service is like employer-employee / employee-contract worker).
Simply put, the ride-sharing platform’s responsibility is only limited to that particular task – to ensure they connect the drivers and the riders. Legally speaking, the ride-sharing platform provider is neither responsible for the driver’s behaviour nor required to sensitise them per the Act. The safety that the ride-sharing platforms try to create is something that only adds to their brand value – not what they are obligated to provide.
Essentially, we are dealing with the following scenario: –
The Ride-sharing platforms that are getting the benefit of the “This Driver Respects Women” sticker campaign are not legally obligated to sensitise their drivers about the issues, nor do they commit to sensitise their drivers, nor do they consider the safety of the passenger to make sensitisation mandatory & the companies that consider this as a CSR campaign are not required to sensitise the drivers.
This leads to only one conclusion: They are just happy to reap the benefits of the sticker without committing to anything.
#3 – Lack of consequences if the driver doesn’t respect.
An Ola driver masturbated while driving a woman.
An Uber driver kissed a passenger’s hand and then pulled her over as his friends watched.
We wish there were no incidents to report, but 1000s of these incidents happen daily. And the consequence of all of this?
Uber, Ola & Other ride-sharing platforms blacklist & suspend the drivers after the complaint is received. This is not a big thing, as the drivers can still pick up rides, even after being blacklisted, by borrowing their friend’s Ride account (The reason why sometimes, the number plate of the auto/cab that picks the person is different from what’s shown in the ride-share app/platform).
Drivers signing a code of conduct during registration doesn’t mean anything because the ride-sharing platforms DON’T take any responsibility for the drivers’ actions.
What’s more, the current emergency response mechanisms are woefully inadequate. Assuming that a person can contact their friends and family members when they feel threatened / unsafe, it is unlikely they will reach in time to save them. This means that they are, without question, at the mercy of fate.
At the mercy of a predator.
In a situation where everything from name, personal number, home address, work address, location, photo, and phone number is compromised, in a situation where ride-sharing platform operators don’t need to take any responsibility to sensitise their drivers, in a situation where personal safety of women is constantly at risk from the moment they attempt to enter the car till they step out of the vehicle in their destination – what value does the sticker “this driver respects women” hold?
Isn’t it a genius marketing ploy to masquerade the underlying problem?
Conclusion
In a country like India, without proper education and training that delves into the nuances of gender dynamics, unconscious biases, microaggressions and appropriate interactions, the sticker is nothing but a shallow promise.
India’s patriarchal culture, where men dominate positions of power, creates an environment where women often feel unsafe. Rideshare companies exploit this fear by using the sticker as a marketing tactic, offering a false sense of security rather than addressing the root causes of women’s safety issues. While the sticker may provide temporary reassurance, it does not change the reality that safety for women in India remains a privilege, not a right.
“This Driver Respects Women” – Does he though?
- X v. Ani Technologies Private Limited, Write Petition No. 8127 of 2019 ↩︎
