4 ms·

When my (now ex-) wife was going to law school, one of the biggest surprises I had was learning how often contracts aren't entirely binding (as long as you have

When my (now ex-) wife was going to law school, one of the biggest surprises I had was learning how often contracts aren't entirely binding (as long as you have the money to actually go to court with real representation). It's easy to think "You agreed, it's clear that you agreed, end of story" but that's not the way contract law actually works. If the parties aren't both getting a roughly equal deal and operating with roughly equal levels of good faith, everything changes. And overall, that's a good thing. "If you don't like it, do something else" isn't much of an option when there's no other "real" option. "Go found your own company that works differently" is a farce for the vast majority of the population.

rectang 8y ago
> (as long as you have the money to actually go to court with real representation) The theoretical ability to contest contract provisions is close to meaningless because the cost of litigation makes it inaccessible for the vast majority of the American people. Arbitration puts justice even further out of reach.
- ergothus 8y ago
  No argument here (though I have no real solution to that problem. Denying everyone lawyers doesn't help, it just slightly shifts who suffers). My point was that on this and related topics the "It's a contract, suck it up" type responses are based on a flawed basis, not that the result is actually just or fair.
SilasX 8y ago
There's no real option to working as an Uber driver? Edit: I'm sorry, the parent comment was predicted on applying "there is no alternative" to the situation "whether you contract for Uber". That doesn't make sense, and I'd appreciate an answer besides a downvote. It seems like a fair question.
- ergothus 8y ago
  If you don't like the Uber terms but are trying to make money driving people, you have severely limited options as to your alternatives to drive for, and I'd not be surprised if they all had arbitration clauses as well. saying "If you don't like the terms, go somewhere else" is likely an illusion of choice and not a practical option.
  - SilasX 8y ago
    And the legal definition of "no choice" means "no choice if you want to make money driving other people in a manner where you set your own hours"? Because you have lots of other options both for employment, and for driving other people (bus driver, shuttle driver, limousine driver...), and for driving (package delivery, truck driver). I just don't get the intuition for how a (relatively) new market entrant in a relatively new market can, in any meaningful sense, be such a vital option that the other side is powerless.
gamblor956 8y ago
That's only true for contracts between businesses and consumers, or generally contracts not involving any businesses. In a B2B contract like between Uber and its drivers, the contract is whatever the parties agree to (as long as there aren't any unlawful provisions), even if there does not appear to be a roughly equal deal.

rectang 8y ago

> (as long as you have the money to actually go to court with real representation) The theoretical ability to contest contract provisions is close to meaningless because the cost of litigation makes it inaccessible for the vast majority of the American people. Arbitration puts justice even further out of reach.

ergothus 8y ago
No argument here (though I have no real solution to that problem. Denying everyone lawyers doesn't help, it just slightly shifts who suffers). My point was that on this and related topics the "It's a contract, suck it up" type responses are based on a flawed basis, not that the result is actually just or fair.

SilasX 8y ago

There's no real option to working as an Uber driver? Edit: I'm sorry, the parent comment was predicted on applying "there is no alternative" to the situation "whether you contract for Uber". That doesn't make sense, and I'd appreciate an answer besides a downvote. It seems like a fair question.

ergothus 8y ago
If you don't like the Uber terms but are trying to make money driving people, you have severely limited options as to your alternatives to drive for, and I'd not be surprised if they all had arbitration clauses as well. saying "If you don't like the terms, go somewhere else" is likely an illusion of choice and not a practical option.
- SilasX 8y ago
  And the legal definition of "no choice" means "no choice if you want to make money driving other people in a manner where you set your own hours"? Because you have lots of other options both for employment, and for driving other people (bus driver, shuttle driver, limousine driver...), and for driving (package delivery, truck driver). I just don't get the intuition for how a (relatively) new market entrant in a relatively new market can, in any meaningful sense, be such a vital option that the other side is powerless.

gamblor956 8y ago

That's only true for contracts between businesses and consumers, or generally contracts not involving any businesses. In a B2B contract like between Uber and its drivers, the contract is whatever the parties agree to (as long as there aren't any unlawful provisions), even if there does not appear to be a roughly equal deal.