3 ms·

> No it wouldn't. Indentured servitude requires someone to be indentured, which is immediately in conflict with OP's correct observation that no one is being fo

by giaour 4y ago

> No it wouldn't. Indentured servitude requires someone to be indentured, which is immediately in conflict with OP's correct observation that no one is being forced to work. You're thinking of slaves. Indentured servants chose to enter into binding contracts. No one forced them to sign away years of their life; they did so of their own volition. US case law would no longer recognize such contracts as valid.

throwaway09223 4y ago
No, I'm thinking of indentured servitude. Which requires them to be indentured, via said contracts. You are agreeing with me. Uber is the antithesis of being tied to a job. You have complete freedom to engage whenever you wish. In fact it is precisely this freedom that "they should be employees" proponents are attacking.