3 ms·

I'm curious how far this line goes, too. If I go to Subway and a worker stabs me, does Subway owe me millions? I'm really confused how Uber is responsible here.

I'm curious how far this line goes, too. If I go to Subway and a worker stabs me, does Subway owe me millions? I'm really confused how Uber is responsible here.. it just seems, odd, to me. Now, if Uber as a company promoted (in one way or another) reckless speeding for the sake of fast drop-offs, and I get hit by an Uber driver, yes I think Uber is at fault (and the driver). However, why does it sound like Uber is responsible for everything "during work hours"?

Chronos 9y ago
If Subway tells the cops "I won't say who it was", and they say "he hasn't worked at Subway for two years anyway" (this being a bald-faced lie), AND the medical bills from the stabbing set you back millions of dollars... damn right, Subway owes you millions. They're making themselves complicit in the crime by obstructing justice, and making it clear that Subway was OK with the stabbing.
- notheguyouthink 9y ago
  Oh I agree completely, but you're adding to what I said. There are many here saying Subway is at fault no matter what. Eg, if they didn't do anything wrong, the person just randomly stabbed me, many here think Subway owes me millions. What do you think? I disagree, it seems bizarre to me because Subway can't possible know what crimes all employees might commit and somehow fight to prevent that. Right? .. actually let me ask you this: In what scenario should Subway not be held liable? So many here blame Subway in my scenario, when they were not even involved.. so what does a company have to do to prevent being sued by employees random, un-predictable actions?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
BinaryIdiot 9y ago
> I'm curious how far this line goes, too. If I go to Subway and a worker stabs me, does Subway owe me millions? I'm really confused how Uber is responsible here.. it just seems, odd, to me. They could be. It depends on the process involved in hiring said worker. If there are little to no checks you could argue Subway was at fault (at least partially) for not properly vetting people being brought in. Another item is you may have missed the part where Uber obstructed justice by initially lying to the police and not correcting it until it was the primary reason they were going back to court. It's a nuanced and contextual issue, not a "how far the line goes".
rm445 9y ago
I agree on the oddness. In my mind, the story about a highly-tracked webapp-facilitated worker committing a crime goes something like: Crime committed -> worker details go to police -> criminal conviction | current mechanisms for direct financial restitution from criminals to crime victims. Or maybe in the case of no criminal conviction, Crime committed -> (messing about with police) | John Doe lawsuit against Uber -> Driver details released -> Lawsuit against driver. Don't get me wrong, Uber just sounds like a lunatic asylum, and their conduct in this case no worse than I'd expect. But it just seems so weird that the chain of events leads to a claim against Uber. I would honestly have expected them to have thrown the driver under a bus while staying rock solid behind their terms and conditions.
- ticviking 9y ago
  Yeah that... did the driver get arrested?
petraeus 9y ago
Yes, you would be smart to sue subway for millions.
wolco 9y ago
If you go into subway and an employee stabs you for no good reason you sue subway
- notheguyouthink 9y ago
  Which is weird to me. Why is a company expected to be onmicient about their employees? Do we have to do psych evals on everyone to make sure they might not do something that the company could be liable for? Why isn't law good enough here? If Subway wasn't involved, isn't the law sufficient? Eg, a person committed a crime, Subway wasn't involved. Do you disagree?

Chronos 9y ago

If Subway tells the cops "I won't say who it was", and they say "he hasn't worked at Subway for two years anyway" (this being a bald-faced lie), AND the medical bills from the stabbing set you back millions of dollars... damn right, Subway owes you millions. They're making themselves complicit in the crime by obstructing justice, and making it clear that Subway was OK with the stabbing.

notheguyouthink 9y ago
Oh I agree completely, but you're adding to what I said. There are many here saying Subway is at fault no matter what. Eg, if they didn't do anything wrong, the person just randomly stabbed me, many here think Subway owes me millions. What do you think? I disagree, it seems bizarre to me because Subway can't possible know what crimes all employees might commit and somehow fight to prevent that. Right? .. actually let me ask you this: In what scenario should Subway not be held liable? So many here blame Subway in my scenario, when they were not even involved.. so what does a company have to do to prevent being sued by employees random, un-predictable actions?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

BinaryIdiot 9y ago

> I'm curious how far this line goes, too. If I go to Subway and a worker stabs me, does Subway owe me millions? I'm really confused how Uber is responsible here.. it just seems, odd, to me. They could be. It depends on the process involved in hiring said worker. If there are little to no checks you could argue Subway was at fault (at least partially) for not properly vetting people being brought in. Another item is you may have missed the part where Uber obstructed justice by initially lying to the police and not correcting it until it was the primary reason they were going back to court. It's a nuanced and contextual issue, not a "how far the line goes".

rm445 9y ago

I agree on the oddness. In my mind, the story about a highly-tracked webapp-facilitated worker committing a crime goes something like: Crime committed -> worker details go to police -> criminal conviction | current mechanisms for direct financial restitution from criminals to crime victims. Or maybe in the case of no criminal conviction, Crime committed -> (messing about with police) | John Doe lawsuit against Uber -> Driver details released -> Lawsuit against driver. Don't get me wrong, Uber just sounds like a lunatic asylum, and their conduct in this case no worse than I'd expect. But it just seems so weird that the chain of events leads to a claim against Uber. I would honestly have expected them to have thrown the driver under a bus while staying rock solid behind their terms and conditions.

ticviking 9y ago
Yeah that... did the driver get arrested?

petraeus 9y ago

Yes, you would be smart to sue subway for millions.

wolco 9y ago

If you go into subway and an employee stabs you for no good reason you sue subway

notheguyouthink 9y ago
Which is weird to me. Why is a company expected to be onmicient about their employees? Do we have to do psych evals on everyone to make sure they might not do something that the company could be liable for? Why isn't law good enough here? If Subway wasn't involved, isn't the law sufficient? Eg, a person committed a crime, Subway wasn't involved. Do you disagree?