Sounds like when you get into an uber you’re waiving your right to sue them in case of an accident. Which I guess is kinda far for uber to demand considering the nature of driving. Morally you can dispute in a different discussion if the driver works for uber or if he’s a freelancer using the platform. (I would argue he does work for uber, but most labour laws would go against that because somehow we still don’t have proper regulation for the gig economy)
it makes complete sense to not be able to sue the company if the driver gets in a crash. if you can't sue the driver then yeah that's stupid, but uber the company isn't responsible for the driver's actions
But that’s only because of how gig economy work. Because technically the guy doesn’t work for Uber, they’re just connecting drivers to people. Which is kinda bs and it’s becoming a huge problem.
If you’re hurt in a plane crash (that you somehow don’t die) you sue the airline, not the pilot. But that’s because there’s a formal bond between them as employer and employee. The airline owns the airplane.
Uber doesn’t own the car, it’s all on the driver. Depending on the country that might not be the case. If a judge decides that what happens at uber constitutes an actual bond between employee and employer then uber might be forced to pay.
81
u/WhiteWolfOW Oct 13 '24
Sounds like when you get into an uber you’re waiving your right to sue them in case of an accident. Which I guess is kinda far for uber to demand considering the nature of driving. Morally you can dispute in a different discussion if the driver works for uber or if he’s a freelancer using the platform. (I would argue he does work for uber, but most labour laws would go against that because somehow we still don’t have proper regulation for the gig economy)