9 ms·

It seems to me, that any decent Law firm would have told her not to tweet about it imho. /ianal

theossuary 10y ago
It doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. If they're investigating her to mount a smear campaign, getting out in front of it sounds like a good idea. But I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know?
ceejayoz 10y ago
Trying a case via the media to push a large company into a settlement is hardly a new strategy, especially with a company like Uber that's getting large amounts of bad PR.
- kartan 10y ago
  > that's getting large amounts of bad PR. Do you mean that is caught doing a lot of nasty stuff? The company has problems, it pushes against workers rights, it leaves towns that don't bow to their business tactics, it is sexist, etc. The "bad PR" is the symptom not the problem. Their actions are the problem.
  - striking 10y ago
    The actions led to the bad PR. Without the bad PR, she wouldn't have spoken up on Twitter about it. I think we're all in agreement except in wording.
  - ceejayoz 10y ago
    It's very well deserved bad PR, yes.
kawera 10y ago
Care to elaborate?
viggity 10y ago
that, or they're giving her a sweetheart deal (i.e. low/no fee) because her case is high profile and they can write it off as an advertising expense.
westbywest 10y ago
Under other circumstances I'd agree this is poor strategy w/r/t preparing for possible future legal defense. Detail here may be that Fowler may soon find herself gagged from disclosing further details, especially if surviving terms in her employment contract with Uber allow for it.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  If Uber tries to use employee covenants to silence Ms. Fowler, what do you think the reaction is going to be? This is just the beginning. If the problems are as systemic as alleged by Ms. Fowler, the litigation will be working its way through courts for years to come.
  - joering2 10y ago
    It has to be this bad or worse! You dont hire ex attorney general who is corrupted on record (currently works for clients that he initally was investigating as GA and of course never got anywhere) if you dont need a player that has "get free from jail" card.
    - zekevermillion 10y ago
      There does not appear to be genuine contrition, that is for sure...
zekevermillion 10y ago
Disagree. Speaking up about Uber's conduct is a personal risk that Ms. Fowler has apparently decided to take, perhaps for reasons of personal integrity. A good lawyer would advise her of the scope and magnitude of risk, and then support her if she chooses to run that risk.
fictioncircle 10y ago
Under normal circumstances, yes. However, in this case, it is already largely public and making Uber look the villain is a viable strategy given that Uber likely is the villain.
noonespecial 10y ago
You are right. A lawyer's job is to minimize your legal risk. The least risky thing to do is to keep silent. That's what he'll reliably tell you to do. It's your job to decide how much risk you are willing to take to speak out. Some fights are worth fighting.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

It doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. If they're investigating her to mount a smear campaign, getting out in front of it sounds like a good idea. But I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know?

ceejayoz 10y ago

Trying a case via the media to push a large company into a settlement is hardly a new strategy, especially with a company like Uber that's getting large amounts of bad PR.

kartan 10y ago
> that's getting large amounts of bad PR. Do you mean that is caught doing a lot of nasty stuff? The company has problems, it pushes against workers rights, it leaves towns that don't bow to their business tactics, it is sexist, etc. The "bad PR" is the symptom not the problem. Their actions are the problem.
- striking 10y ago
  The actions led to the bad PR. Without the bad PR, she wouldn't have spoken up on Twitter about it. I think we're all in agreement except in wording.
- ceejayoz 10y ago
  It's very well deserved bad PR, yes.

kawera 10y ago

Care to elaborate?

viggity 10y ago

that, or they're giving her a sweetheart deal (i.e. low/no fee) because her case is high profile and they can write it off as an advertising expense.

westbywest 10y ago

Under other circumstances I'd agree this is poor strategy w/r/t preparing for possible future legal defense. Detail here may be that Fowler may soon find herself gagged from disclosing further details, especially if surviving terms in her employment contract with Uber allow for it.

zekevermillion 10y ago
If Uber tries to use employee covenants to silence Ms. Fowler, what do you think the reaction is going to be? This is just the beginning. If the problems are as systemic as alleged by Ms. Fowler, the litigation will be working its way through courts for years to come.
- joering2 10y ago
  It has to be this bad or worse! You dont hire ex attorney general who is corrupted on record (currently works for clients that he initally was investigating as GA and of course never got anywhere) if you dont need a player that has "get free from jail" card.
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    There does not appear to be genuine contrition, that is for sure...

zekevermillion 10y ago

Disagree. Speaking up about Uber's conduct is a personal risk that Ms. Fowler has apparently decided to take, perhaps for reasons of personal integrity. A good lawyer would advise her of the scope and magnitude of risk, and then support her if she chooses to run that risk.

fictioncircle 10y ago

Under normal circumstances, yes. However, in this case, it is already largely public and making Uber look the villain is a viable strategy given that Uber likely is the villain.

noonespecial 10y ago

You are right. A lawyer's job is to minimize your legal risk. The least risky thing to do is to keep silent. That's what he'll reliably tell you to do. It's your job to decide how much risk you are willing to take to speak out. Some fights are worth fighting.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]