Day: November 23, 2025

• Uber and Lyft often charge different prices for the same ride-hailing trip, a new study says.
• Comparing both apps could collectively save riders millions of dollars, the study said.
• Even so, few people compare prices when ordering a ride.

Next time you need a ride, checking both Uber and Lyft might save you money.

On average, there is a 14% difference in price for the same ride between the two ride-hailing apps, according to a study conducted for the National Bureau of Economic Research and published this month. The study compared fares on Uber and Lyft in New York City in February of this year.

The difference might be just a dollar or two on each ride, but it can add up: The researchers behind the paper estimated that the gap, called “price dispersion” in economics, means that ride-hailing customers in New York City pay an extra $300 million annually by not comparing prices.

Yet few Lyft or Uber passengers check more than one app when they need a ride, the researchers found. Using separate data from Comscore, the study said that about 16% of ride-hailing customers across the US check both apps.

“Competition should be a click away, but people are acting like it isn’t,” Michael Luca, a professor at Johns Hopkins University’s Carey Business School and one of the paper’s authors, told Business Insider.

Harry Hartfield, head of product policy at Uber, said the study does not consider all the factors that can influence Uber’s pricing, including the supply of drivers, customer demand, or the distance between the driver and the hailer. “The idea that two companies would display different prices isn’t surprising — that’s how a competitive marketplace works,” Harfield said.

Sid Patil, Lyft’s executive vice president of marketplace, said that Lyft also uses factors such as driver availability to determine prices. “Riders have a lot to gain, and little to lose by checking Lyft,” he said.

“Price differences reflect real marketplace dynamics,” Patil said, adding

The research found that “neither rideshare app is consistently more expensive than the other.” Rather, it varied from fare to fare.

In theory, opening another rideshare app to get a second price quote should take less than a minute, Luca said.

In reality, the ride-hailing apps you use might be like your most-used search engine: While some people go out of their way to use a specific one, many others simply use whatever the default on their device or web browser is, Luca added

The design and terms of the apps themselves may also make it harder for customers to compare prices, according to the study. Uber doesn’t allow third parties to use its API to offer price comparisons, for instance — a barrier that some apps that analyze ride-hailing driver pay have also run into because Uber says it violates the app’s terms of service.

According to Luca, barriers to price comparison have helped, not hurt, these companies.

Last year, for the first time, Uber reported an annual profit. And Lyft has turned around its financial results over the last few years.

“Together, these findings show that small barriers to comparison can weaken effective competition and shift surplus toward platforms,” the paper concludes.

Do you have a story to share about Uber, Lyft, or another company in the gig work space? Contact this reporter at abitter@businessinsider.com.

On September 11, a Marilyn Monroe impersonator sang a sultry rendition of “Happy Birthday” to an executive at the Virginia headquarters of the Society for Human Resource Management.

The brief performance, which took place in a conference room with about 75 employees, came after remarks honoring the 24th anniversary of the 2001 terror attacks.

Two former staffers who were present at the gathering, recordings of which were reviewed by Business Insider, said it was uncomfortable to see — and not just because it was sexually suggestive. They found it inappropriate because their former employer, also known as SHRM, is the world’s largest HR trade group.

SHRM has been embroiled in controversy in recent years. Some of these challenges have gripped workplaces across the country, including regular layoffs and restructurings and debates over DEI.

Other elements, however, set SHRM apart. They include a new attendance policy that penalizes workers who arrive even a minute after 9 a.m.; a memo about a “conservative” dress code that referenced “enclothed cognition” and bans sequins; an employment discrimination lawsuit set to go to trial in December; and a company-wide meeting in which CEO Johnny C. Taylor Jr. said some staffers were “entitled,” “complacent,” and “sloppy.”

The issues raise questions about SHRM’s role as an arbiter of human resources best practices. Thousands of HR professionals rely on SHRM’s educational materials and credentialing programs to get ahead in their careers. It shapes not only HR departments across the country, but also national policy, briefing judges and lawmakers on workforce practices.

Now, some professionals are deciding not to renew their memberships, and former employees are speaking out about their experiences on social media.

“If your business is about teaching others what to do in the people space, then it’s incredibly important that you model that yourself,” said Ashley Herd, a former head of HR for North America at McKinsey, co-host of the podcast “HR Besties,” and founder of Manager Method, a management-training company.

“No organization is expected to be perfect, but SHRM puts out articles and charges a lot of money to teach about best practices,” added Herd. “When they don’t follow those practices themselves, that really does speak volumes.”

SHRM said that Taylor, a lawyer and executive who was named CEO in late 2017, deserved credit for turning the organization around. “Change is not a sign of instability — it’s a sign of leadership,” spokesperson Eddie Burke wrote in an email to Business Insider.

In a statement, Taylor said he believes SHRM is fulfilling its mission of partnering “with HR professionals and the CEO community.”

“We’re doing it better than ever,” he told Business Insider.

Revenue grew from $131 million in 2017 to $233 million last year, according to public tax filings. It has 413 employees today, up from 387 in December 2017.

This article is based on conversations with more than two dozen current and former SHRM employees and nearly a dozen current and former members, as well as legal and tax filings and government records.

‘Entitled,’ ‘complacent,’ and ‘sloppy’

SHRM was founded in 1948 and today describes itself as “the foremost expert, researcher, advocate, and thought leader on issues and innovations impacting today’s evolving workplaces.”

Former staffers characterized it as a punitive workplace.

Under a policy instituted earlier this year, those who arrived even one minute past 9 a.m. were told to go to security and have someone on the executive team escort them to their desks, former employees said. Two former staffers said that they saw a pregnant colleague cry because she fell and hurt herself running to the entrance to make it in on time.

A memo sent to SHRM’s brand and marketing staff in January laid out a dress code that included a lengthy introduction about “enclothed cognition,” a term that refers to the notion that the clothing workers wear impacts their performance. The code required staff to dress in “conservative” business attire and prohibited items such as sneakers, denim, skorts, sequins, hats, and clothing that doesn’t cover the area between the shoulders and knees.

Burke said “SHRM offers employees the flexibility to arrive between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m.” and noted that the workplace is remote Mondays and Fridays. He said the trade group at large has a business-casual dress code, and said “enclothed cognition” was not a company policy.

Nearly all former SHRM employees who spoke to Business Insider said there was confusion and fear of retaliation in the workplace.

In an all-hands meeting last month, a recording of which was obtained by Business Insider, Taylor called many of the organization’s employees “entitled,” “complacent,” and “sloppy.”

The comments were part of a broader announcement about forthcoming layoffs. Taylor said that he hadn’t yet consulted with anyone about his plans, according to the recording.

“Literally, I’ve not told anyone, because I’ve been trying to figure out where I was going to land, and I’ve landed on a decision,” Taylor said. “I am going to reorganize the business of SHRM. There will be a total reorg … And this is not a decision that I’ve made again with anyone, no one.”

His comments came several weeks after another call with a smaller group of staffers in which he said no layoffs were planned. Snippets of both meetings were compiled by Benjamin Schmidt, a former employee, and posted publicly to TikTok.

SHRM cut staff earlier this month. In an internal video message viewed by Business Insider announcing the reductions, Taylor said SHRM treated people with dignity during layoffs, describing SHRM’s approach as “red carpet in, red carpet out.”

In his statement, Taylor said November’s “organizational redesign is about shifting for the future, not reacting to the past,” adding that the cuts were not due to financial strain and that the organization has an “enviable balance sheet.”

Former employees said layoffs occurred annually in recent years. They said Taylor frequently reorganized the business, resulting in job cuts and reassignments for those who remained. In some cases, full teams were let go.

“It was made very clear to all that if you were not 100% aligned with whatever the latest messaging was from SHRM leadership, you were encouraged to find another job,” said one former staffer.

In his statement, Taylor said, “Over the last several years, which were characterized by ultra-low unemployment rates and a war for talent, we hired individuals who were not aligned with SHRM’s mission, values, or culture.”

“That’s on us — and we’ve corrected it. We are transparent internally about what doesn’t work here, and when it’s not a fit, people should move on.”

‘Setting the standard’

Over the past several years, layoffs have become commonplace in industries like tech and media. Companies such as Google and Microsoft have regularly trimmed their ranks, and the trend doesn’t show any signs of slowing down: During its latest round of cuts, Amazon said it expected to uncover “additional places we can remove layers” and “realize efficiency gains” in 2026.

Repeated layoffs can be a sign of poor leadership, said Herd, the former head of HR for North America at McKinsey.

“They’re literally describing themselves as experts in all things work and selling best practices in talent planning. To then turn around and do layoffs themselves, it stings for the workers who you thought were a fit for all these years. It rings hollow to put the blame ostensibly on the people you chose to hire.”

“Whether they like it or not, they are held to a higher standard because they’ve put themselves out there as the preeminent expert on work.”

“It shows there are gaps in their talent planning,” she said.

Some former employees said colleagues who openly questioned leadership’s decisions or cited concerns about SHRM’s workplace culture were gone soon after.

Burke, the SHRM spokesperson, said the suggestion that employees were terminated for having differing views “does not reflect how SHRM operates.”

“This is not about silencing dissent — it is about ensuring that our teams remain aligned, effective, and able to execute with excellence,” he said.

Daniel Burchfield, who joined SHRM’s affiliated charitable foundation in 2024, said performance issues were cited in his February termination. But he said he hadn’t been reprimanded or put on a performance improvement plan. “Nothing negative was indicated to me,” he said.

Two weeks before his termination, Burchfield said he told his manager he was worried about layoffs. He said the manager replied that SHRM likes to maintain an atmosphere of fear to drive performance. Burchfield said he told his manager that logic was “unhealthy.”

SHRM itself has said as much. “It’s important for leaders to recognize that fear at work can cause a host of ill effects that undermine the quality of people’s output as well as overall team performance,” reads a 2023 article on its website titled “How to Remove Fear from Your Work Culture.”

“SHRM is meant to be setting the standard for how to run a workplace,” Alexandria Kinsey, a former employee who was fired in April, told Business Insider. “They do the opposite of what they preach.”

Kinsey was let go in part because she had become “disruptive,” the organization said. She said her behavior was a response to SHRM’s “broken and toxic system.”

‘Far from best practices’

In 2022, Rehab Mohamed, an Egyptian woman who worked at SHRM as an instructional designer, filed a lawsuit against the organization in Colorado federal court.

Mohamed, who was at SHRM from 2016 to 2020, said in her suit that she was racially discriminated against by a white supervisor and faced retaliation for complaining to management. She said she raised concerns about racial discrimination and retaliation with leadership, including Taylor and SHRM’s human-resources head, throughout the summer of 2020.

Last year, a judge called the case “messy” and said the evidence showed that the same HR person tasked with investigating Mohamed’s complaints was also ghostwriting emails for Mohamed’s boss and drafting Mohamed’s termination paperwork around the same time.

SHRM’s guide on “How to Conduct a Workplace Investigation,” dated about two weeks after that decision, said investigators “should focus on being impartial to gather and consider relevant facts and should not push the investigation in any particular direction.”

SHRM has consistently denied Mohamed’s claims. In his statement, Taylor said that “SHRM doesn’t comment on pending cases, but we will say this: we do not settle meritless cases. We know the facts, and we trust the process.”

Lawyers for Mohamed didn’t reply to calls or emails.

The case, which is scheduled to begin jury selection on December 1, is unusual, Evan Fray-Witzer, an employment lawyer in Boston, told Business Insider. Workplace-discrimination lawsuits rarely get this far, he said. Further, SHRM didn’t bring an independent investigator to oversee its internal probe into the matter, the court found.

This is “far from best practices,” Fray-Witzer said.

In response to questions from Mohamed’s lawyers, SHRM revealed the existence of two other discrimination complaints from employees. One case, filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2018, was settled. The other, filed with a California regulator in 2021, is pending.

Removing ‘equity’

Following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, SHRM made DEI a focus of its educational materials. In 2021, a Harvard Business Review Analytic Services report sponsored by SHRM concluded that company leaders should make DEI a strategic priority. It said that DEI is not only “the right thing to do,” but research shows DEI leaders outperform their competitors financially.

In July 2024, SHRM jettisoned the term “equity” from what it now calls “inclusion and diversity,” or I&D, prompting social-media backlash from many members and others in the HR community.

SHRM cited Taylor’s reasoning for the move in a LinkedIn post that drew nearly 1,000 comments, writing that he has said that “by emphasizing Inclusion-first, we aim to address the current shortcomings of DE&I programs.”

In his statement, Taylor said the removal of “equity” from SHRM’s messaging was driven by data indicating that the word is confusing and polarizing.

“While we fully respect some employees and some SHRM members didn’t agree with that decision, we are very clear all workplace I&D strategy should be legally compliant, workplace unifying, and business accretive,” Taylor said.

In recent years, many employers have pulled back or ended DEI programs, concluding the programs were misguided or facing pressure from conservative activists and the second Trump administration.

Because SHRM spent years producing DEI materials for HR leaders, its shift was conspicuous, said Don A. Moore, a leadership and communication professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley.

For some staffers, concerns about SHRM’s shift away from DEI were exacerbated by Taylor’s connection to the Trump administration. Bloomberg Law reported that Taylor was among those being discussed as a potential labor secretary in Trump’s second term, while he chaired an advisory board focused on HBCUs and served on the White House Workforce Policy Advisory Board in the first administration.

Taylor has personally supported both Republicans and Democrats over the years. SHRM spent $1 million to $2 million annually on lobbying in recent years, US Senate filings show.

Paul Lalonde, who has worked in HR for more than a decade and lives in the Chicago area, said Taylor and SHRM are “kowtowing” to the Trump administration. Lalonde said he declined to renew his SHRM membership in response.

SHRM’s shift away from DEI has impacted its business relationships. In 2024, the American Heart Association pulled out of a partnership with SHRM’s affiliated charitable foundation, partially in connection with the group’s move away from a focus on equity, according to three people with knowledge of the relationship. The groups had collaborated on a report on racial gaps in healthcare access and outcomes that led to the SHRM Foundation being paid at least six figures, according to two people.

Representatives for SHRM and AHA characterized the amounts paid as “modest” or “routine.” Greg Donaldson, an AHA spokesman, said its contract with SHRM’s foundation expired and was not renewed because of a change in “strategic direction” and said it would be “inaccurate” to say the collaboration ended over the word “equity.”

Burke, the SHRM spokesperson, said the American Heart Association was “a valued member” and said SHRM looks “forward to continuing to explore ways of working with them in the future.”

SHRM hit a nerve with some in the HR community again with the choice of anti-DEI activist Starbuck as a conference speaker last month, alongside Van Jones, a CNN host and entrepreneur, and Taylor, who moderated the conversation.

Starbuck has repeatedly called DEI “poison.” At the event, he said he believes “equity” is a “Marxist concept.”

“Diversity is one of the most pressing and polarizing issues for our workforces,” Taylor said in a LinkedIn video announcing the event. “To move our organizations forward, we must leave behind the echo chambers and lean into difficult conversations.” SHRM also changed the event’s name to Blueprint from its previous moniker, Inclusion.

Shari Dunn, a DEI consultant and author in Portland, Oregon, who is Black, said she found Starbuck’s speaking invitation offensive. She canceled her membership over the organization’s retreat from DEI principles.

“They claim this is a free exchange of ideas and they’re just trying to bring different opinions,” she said. “My humanity and intelligence can’t be a ‘different opinion.'”

Not all SHRM members opposed Starbuck’s participation. Dave Greenlaw, an HR executive in Washington D.C., previously told Business Insider that he planned to attend even though he disagreed with Starbuck. He said he believed HR leaders need to understand the full corporate landscape, even when it might be uncomfortable.

In a statement to Business Insider, Starbuck said he spent two hours taking photos with conference attendees after he finished speaking.

“So clearly, not every HR professional felt distressed to have my voice included,” he said. “It was nice to have a productive conversation with Johnny and Van about making workplaces less divisive.”

Some of SHRM’s members have said publicly they would cancel their membership, which gives them access to templates, legal information, and other resources. Membership revenue increased in 2024, from $69 million to $75.6 million, according to its tax filings. Figures for 2025 aren’t yet available. SHRM said its overall membership number has grown about 16% over the course of Taylor’s tenure.

At least part of last year’s revenue increase may have been due to an 8% price hike for the annual membership that took place in February 2024. The cost of an annual membership rose by another 13% earlier this year, to $299.

Taylor’s total compensation has also grown. He received $4 million last year, more than five times what he made in 2018 and a 48% increase from what he was paid in 2022.

‘Policy, not politics’

Taylor started his career as a law-firm associate, and then went on to serve in legal and HR roles at companies including Paramount Pictures, Alamo Rent a Car, and Blockbuster, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Before joining SHRM, Taylor led the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, a nonprofit that supports historically and predominantly Black schools, from 2010 to 2017. Business Insider identified two appearance-related complaints during his tenure.

The organization settled a discrimination lawsuit filed by an employee, Tara Smith, who said she was fired for refusing to wear pantyhose to business meetings. The fund said Smith had been insubordinate.

In his statement, Burke said that Taylor “refused to settle this lawsuit because he believed it was meritless, and even when the organization settled it after his departure, he refused to participate in the settlement.”

A student also launched a Change.org petition signed by more than 6,800 people in opposition to the organization’s ban on dreadlocks for male participants in its Leadership Institute. The student wrote that his acceptance was rescinded because of his hairstyle and called the policy “discriminatory, sexist, and contrary to TMCF’s mission of supporting” students from historically Black colleges and universities.

TMCF did not respond to a request for comment.

At SHRM, meanwhile, Taylor has said the organization talks “policy, not politics.”

Roger King, a longtime employment lawyer with the CHRO Association, an HR policy organization, said Taylor deserves credit for growing SHRM’s membership and talking openly about the group’s decision-making on diversity topics.

“Many in the business community have gone silent, or certainly have reduced their rhetoric, on this whole issue,” he told Business Insider.

On TikTok, Kinsey and Schmidt, who both worked on SHRM’s social media team, have posted roughly a dozen videos about their experiences at the organization. The videos have been collectively viewed more than 1 million times.

Kinsey said the group’s treatment of its workers shows “hypocrisy,” while Schmidt compared his work at SHRM to “the marketing department for the Death Star.”

“I highly encourage you to never give a dollar to this organization,” Schmidt said in one video. It was filmed in SHRM’s offices.

Have a tip? Know more? Reach Sarah E. Needleman and Jack Newsham via email (sneedleman@businessinsider.com and jnewsham@businessinsider.com) or via Signal (saraheneedleman.13 and +1-314-971-1627). Use a personal email address, a nonwork device, and nonwork WiFi; here’s our guide to sharing information securely.

• Chips Ahoy is reinventing its classic cookies to stay relevant with Gen Z.
• In its latest cross-brand collaboration, Chips Ahoy created a “Stranger Things” themed cookie.
• The legacy brand aims to innovate more quickly and capture new flavor trends as snack tastes change.

One of America’s favorite cookies has gotten a makeover — and it’s aimed squarely at Gen Z.

Chips Ahoy has released one of its largest cross-brand collaborations in partnership with Netflix’s “Stranger Things,” which returns for its final season on November 26.

The inky black soft chew cookies evoke the show’s dark aesthetic, with an ’80s-themed package that would fit perfectly in Winona Ryder’s kitchen.

“Stranger Things,” a cultural touchstone since its 2016 debut, has been a particular hit with Gen Z viewers, despite many of them having been born long after the era of hair metal and satanic panic.

Chris Park, Mondelez International’s Director of Savory Revenue Growth Management, was the project lead on the “Stranger Things” collaboration in his former role as Director of Chips Ahoy Innovation.

“From our brand point of view, we really want new ways to connect with our consumers, especially that Gen Z audience, and what better way to do that than with “Stranger Things”?” Park told Business Insider. “Partnerships, I think, are one of the biggest things that we can do to be part of the cultural conversation.”

A snack industry re-shaped for Gen Z’s tastes

Branding experts told Business Insider in September that good cross-brand partnerships can be hard to pull off — especially when targeting Gen Z customers, because of their demand for well-integrated authenticity from marketing campaigns — but, when done well, can offer both brands a chance at viral sales, to shape the social conversation around their products, and potentially expand their audience.

That’s what Chips Ahoy, and its parent company Mondelēz, are after, as the snack giant aims to capture consumers’ attention at a time when they’re snacking less, cutting down on processed foods, and have more options than ever.

The “Stranger Things” cookie features a strawberry center in a nod to the color scheme in the “upside down” parallel dimension, where much of the show takes place. It’s also the first time Chips Ahoy has experimented with a fruit flavor — itself an intentional nod toward Gen Z.

“Some of the trends that we see are that, especially with Gen Z, they love to try snacks with new flavors, whether that’s something trending or that they’ve tried at restaurants,” Park said. “Certain combinations are a very appealing flavor package to them. The cinnamon bun cookie we launched this year is a good example of that strategy — so is the strawberry and chocolate.”

New flavors for new generations

Chips Ahoy debuted in 1963 under the Nabisco brand, which was acquired by Mondelēz in 2000. In the years since, the company has experimented with flavors like red velvet, s’mores, and confetti cake. Going forward, Park said they aim to be bolder with their flavor combinations, hoping to capitalize on viral trends like Dubai chocolate, or black sesame and matcha, which Yelp on November 18 identified as increasingly popular in its 2026 trend forecast.

And Chips Ahoy isn’t the only snack brand leaning hard into Gen Z’s tastes. Oreo, which is also owned by Mondelēz, launched its Reese’s-Oreo product line in September, targeting the younger demographic after the flavor combination gained popularity on TikTok, according to Michelle Deignan, the brand’s VP of Marketing, who spoke to Business Insider at the time.

However, expanding the variety of flavors available comes with operational challenges for a company the size of Chips Ahoy, as it needs to scale up the millions, or even billions, of cookies for any given flavor launch. As a result, Park said the company is actively working to streamline its innovation process for future product line-ups, even if that means limited-time runs or regional drops.

“As a company, we want to look at ways to be faster and to really meet those trends quickly, whether and even if it’s more on a smaller scale that gives consumers and our fans a chance to experience our product with those fast-moving trends,” Park said. “That’s something we’re really, really looking at.”

Park said Chips Ahoy has to balance staying true to its iconic legacy while modernizing its offerings to keep up with changing tastes in the snack industry. It could be an uphill battle — Business Insider reported in July that Mondelēz’s sales volume in the US fell during the company’s second quarter due to changes in consumer snacking behavior — but Park said it’s one the brand is going all-in on.

“Whether it’s new flavors, other innovations that will come next year, new partners, new limited editions that will eventually make their way into the market — we as a brand are really diving into becoming even more relevant with our audience,” Park said.