Uber forces its drivers to arbitrate, rather than sue, but Uber also won't arbitrate

#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/12/09/justice-denied.html

7 Likes

#2

Uber is a scam.

12 Likes

#3
13 Likes

#4

A copy of the agreement is freely available at corporate headquarters. Look in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “beware of the leopard.”

22 Likes

#5

Uber and Lyft drivers
are the rickshaw “men”
of the 21st century.

[A speculative present to future version of the Toshiro Mifume film “Rickshaw Man”
with the pizza delivery elements of Snowcrash?]

4 Likes

#6

actually don’t rickshaw (wo)men own their rickshaws and keep 100% of their profits, less taxes + some kind of permit from the city? So unlike uber since they’re keeping majority of profits and beholden to no one but the city code on pickups

6 Likes

#7

I think that is the key right there. They tried to use a loophole to avoid accountability. Now they are being hung by their own loophole. Seems as just as we could hope, should be a wakeup call to close these sorts of predatory signing away of rights contracts. rights are considered rights for good reason, any company that tries to circumvent them is the worst type of company.

glad they had the critical mass to get noticed instead of brushed aside. wish they didn’t have to use themselves as cannon fodder, or that so many others in similar situations aren’t able to band together like this. hopefully people notice and more sustainable changes can be made to protect workers.

6 Likes

#8

How stupid would an investor have to be to look at Uber and think, man I want a part of the action of whatever that company is getting into when it seems like what it’s continually getting into is court.

5 Likes

#9

On the one hand, fuck Uber

Both hands, both middle fingers. Forever.

4 Likes

#10

Anyone really surprised by this? I already knew corporations have bought every level of our government.

1 Like

#11

Binding arbitration agreements were formalized in 1925, allowing two corporate entities of roughly equal size to resolve their disputes outside of a court

Not sure where you’re getting the “equal size” part, but, yeah, arbitration sucks and should be done away with.

2 Likes

#12

#bewareoftheleopard

0 Likes

#13

The obvious question: can JAMS sue Uber, or did their contract require them to settle disagreements by arbitration…?

1 Like

#14

Next step: Uber argues that they can’t litigate to enforce the terms of the arbitration agreement; it has to be arbitrated instead. Making Uber recursively evil.

0 Likes

#15

I wouldn’t go as far as “arbitration sucks and should be done away with”. There are times when two parties might decide it makes sense to arbitrate. It can take years to get a court date in some places, and you never know who you might end up with as a judge and how well they understand your industry. This is usually the “two corporate entities of roughly equal size” situation.

What sucks is the use of arbitration in consumer contracts as a tool to avoid class action lawsuits.

1 Like

#16

What sucks is the creation of a subversive “court” system that undermines what should be the standard, applicable system for all. BTW, if you arbitrate, you still have to work w/ the court anyway, so says the Act. Takes too long? Well, one might argue that that’s a good deterrent anyway. One might conversely argue that more judges are needed. Judge not familiar w/ the “industry” material? Something tells me arbitrators/mediators are often in the same boat.

0 Likes

closed #17

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

0 Likes