4 ms·
For me this is the most shocking: " the case was only able to move forward because Diaz had not signed one of Tesla’s mandatory arbitration agreements which th
by piokoch 5y ago
For me this is the most shocking:
" the case was only able to move forward because Diaz had not signed one of Tesla’s mandatory arbitration agreements which the company uses to force employees to resolve disputes without a public trial"
I think this is something very US-specific that is it legal to have an agreement that someone gives up basic citizen right like going to court and the right to have a public trial.
In most countries something like this is just an abusive clause in the contract and is invalid automatically.
- throwaway4good 5y agoIt is quite a normal thing in subcontracting.
- fwsgonzo 5y agoIt should be extremely illegal and looked down upon.
- trabant00 5y agoActually we have this practice in Europe too and it is legal. Do note it is for civil disputes only.
- coretx 5y agoEh, not exactly. Altough you are supposed to try and resolve without going to court by law ( rendering such a clause redundant ), you ( natural person ) can not wave certain rights such as for example the right to go to court and have justice...
- BBC-vs-neolibs 5y agoBut in many cases the contract as written is very over-reaching. In many European rights, the language of the contracts sign away rights which can not be signed away.
- 101_101 5y agoWait till you hear about how they treat amazon warehouse workers. But AWS is pretty cool huh? lol
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jpambrun 5y agoIt makes sense when the compensations are incredibly high as demonstrated here..
- koonsolo 5y agoIn other countries we don't tend to hit the jackpot when suing companies. At least in EU, we try to have laws to prevent things. In US there are less such laws, but you are able to sue for huge amounts of money. Kind of like "ask permission" vs "ask forgiveness". At least that is how I see it, so correct me if I'm totally off here.