3 ms·

This is like forcing bank tellers to pay back their salary to the government because the bank management didn't follow the rules.

by trendia 10y ago

vkou 10y ago
Or like making street drug dealers pay any gains from the proceeds of their sales, as opposed to the kingpins. Which is, in fact, exactly how we deal with organized crime. (The kingpins, if caught, will pay too.) Just because Michael Corleone ordered a hit, generally doesn't mean that you get to keep whatever he paid you. At least the drivers have legal recourse, in the form of suing Uber.
frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
In your simile, are the bank tellers also breaking the law?
elastic_church 10y ago
you make it sound like that is an unfathomable reality to be used an analogy for how ridiculous the Uber scenario is, except that would be reality. all banks operate under licensing regimes these days. if a legislature also decided to hold bank tellers personally liable because they were operating without a license personally or their organization wasn't, it would be the same. Does the Norwegian government do that? Well I wouldn't have been able to tell you they did that for taxi drivers there 5 minutes ago. The point is that its not actually far fetched.
this_user 10y ago
Except in this analogy the bank would be a rogue operation that deliberately and openly defies local law. And the teller would be someone who knowingly participates in breaking the law. So it's really more akin being a member of the mob.
lazyasciiart 10y ago
No, it's not. It's more like the US practice of charging people with a misdemeanor crime for selling insurance without a license, which can be levied even against someone selling insurance for a company . Zenefits employees, for instance, risked felony charges in some states and if the company had continued to do business that way I think it's plausible some would have been convicted. However Zenefits changed their leadership, publicly said it was wrong of them and that they wouldn't do it again. Uber has doubled down and said "nah mate we're cool what are you going to do about it". Surprise, the Norwegians are calling their bluff.
manarth 10y ago
because the bank management didn't follow the rules In this analogy, 1. Does the bank teller understand that the rules aren't being followed? 2. Is the teller legally obliged to understand the rules? If a bar-tender serves someone underage, the bar is liable, but so is the bar-tender. Bar-tenders are required to understand the rules (and ignorance of the law is not an excuse for not following the law).

This is like forcing bank tellers to pay back their salary to the government because the bank management didn't follow the rules.

by trendia 10y ago

This is like forcing bank tellers to pay back their salary to the government because the bank management didn't follow the rules.

vkou 10y ago

Or like making street drug dealers pay any gains from the proceeds of their sales, as opposed to the kingpins. Which is, in fact, exactly how we deal with organized crime. (The kingpins, if caught, will pay too.) Just because Michael Corleone ordered a hit, generally doesn't mean that you get to keep whatever he paid you. At least the drivers have legal recourse, in the form of suing Uber.

frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago

In your simile, are the bank tellers also breaking the law?

elastic_church 10y ago

you make it sound like that is an unfathomable reality to be used an analogy for how ridiculous the Uber scenario is, except that would be reality. all banks operate under licensing regimes these days. if a legislature also decided to hold bank tellers personally liable because they were operating without a license personally or their organization wasn't, it would be the same. Does the Norwegian government do that? Well I wouldn't have been able to tell you they did that for taxi drivers there 5 minutes ago. The point is that its not actually far fetched.

this_user 10y ago

Except in this analogy the bank would be a rogue operation that deliberately and openly defies local law. And the teller would be someone who knowingly participates in breaking the law. So it's really more akin being a member of the mob.

lazyasciiart 10y ago

No, it's not. It's more like the US practice of charging people with a misdemeanor crime for selling insurance without a license, which can be levied even against someone selling insurance for a company . Zenefits employees, for instance, risked felony charges in some states and if the company had continued to do business that way I think it's plausible some would have been convicted. However Zenefits changed their leadership, publicly said it was wrong of them and that they wouldn't do it again. Uber has doubled down and said "nah mate we're cool what are you going to do about it". Surprise, the Norwegians are calling their bluff.

manarth 10y ago

because the bank management didn't follow the rules In this analogy, 1. Does the bank teller understand that the rules aren't being followed? 2. Is the teller legally obliged to understand the rules? If a bar-tender serves someone underage, the bar is liable, but so is the bar-tender. Bar-tenders are required to understand the rules (and ignorance of the law is not an excuse for not following the law).