3 ms·

Uber fight to dismiss rape lawsuit shows it wont take responsibility for drivers

10 points by grej 12y ago

h43k3r 12y ago
I am very sad for the Indian Startups in this space who are facing a lot of problems because of the rape incident involving Uber. I understand that some things are beyond the control of these companies but incidents like this affect the public opinion about these companies in a very negative way. 1. TaxiForSure founders have to sell their company to Ola Cabs mainly because of this incident. 2. Indian Govt has banned all the mobile cab providers in Delhi, the National Capital and is trying to enforce the country wide ban. [1] http://www.livemint.com/Companies/t7TozTlZCAmvtSxog3OQ7L/Behind-TaxiForSures-sellout.html#nav=most_read http://www.livemint.com/Companies/t7TozTlZCAmvtSxog3OQ7L/Beh... [2] http://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/government-mulls-pan-india-ban-of-uber-ola-and-taxiforsure-apps-678203 http://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/government-mulls-pan-india...
sokoloff 12y ago
I'm having a hard time figuring out the legal theory under which Uber should be responsible for the illegal act of an Uber driver, even if that driver were judged to be an employee (contrary to Uber's claims & TOS). If I were to rape someone, would my employer be liable? If I were a "legit" cab driver and raped someone, would the cab company be liable? If I were staying in a Marriott and got raped by a hotel staffer, would Marriott be liable? Same case in airbnb. Do people really think that online companies have a higher duty of care or liability than offline equivalents?
- sn3twork 12y ago
  I mean I can easily think of a reason in which they should be responsible. If they weren't doing background checks on their employees, or ignoring results from those, or not being thorough in them?
  - clinta 12y ago
    I'm not a lawyer and can't comment on if they are liable or not, but I take issue with the idea that they should be. Adding this liability just compounds the current issues where felons are nearly incapable of becoming employed after serving their sentence. If the state determines that a person is safe enough to the general public to be released from prison, why should an employer be expected to investigate beyond that? On the flip side, if a person is a significant threat, the state should be liable for letting them out of prison, not the employer who hired them.
- greenyoda 12y ago
  "even if that driver were judged to be an employee (contrary to Uber's claims & TOS)" If a company's claims and TOS are contrary to local law, they're meaningless. A company doesn't get to determine whether their people are legally considered to be contractors or employees. In the U.S., at least, that's determined by federal labor laws, which have specific criteria based on how the job is carried out (e.g., how much autonomy the worker has in performing their job).[1] "If I were a 'legit' cab driver and raped someone, would the cab company be liable?" Let's assume that the crime occurred while the driver was on the job, driving the cab. If there were local laws stating that cab drivers needed to pass certain background checks to be hired, and the company didn't perform those checks, then the company could be liable. In NYC, for example, a criminal background check is required for a driver to get a Taxi & Limousine Commission license (these cover medallion cabs and other FHVs - for-hire vehicles).[2] If Uber has drivers who are not licensed taxi drivers, and they don't do their own background checks, it's possible that they could face legal liability if a driver committed a crime. [1] http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/docs/contractors.asp http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/docs/contractors.asp [2] http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/driver_req_checklist.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/driver_req_checkli...

10 points by grej 12y ago

I am very sad for the Indian Startups in this space who are facing a lot of problems because of the rape incident involving Uber. I understand that some things are beyond the control of these companies but incidents like this affect the public opinion about these companies in a very negative way. 1. TaxiForSure founders have to sell their company to Ola Cabs mainly because of this incident. 2. Indian Govt has banned all the mobile cab providers in Delhi, the National Capital and is trying to enforce the country wide ban. [1] http://www.livemint.com/Companies/t7TozTlZCAmvtSxog3OQ7L/Behind-TaxiForSures-sellout.html#nav=most_read http://www.livemint.com/Companies/t7TozTlZCAmvtSxog3OQ7L/Beh... [2] http://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/government-mulls-pan-india-ban-of-uber-ola-and-taxiforsure-apps-678203 http://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/government-mulls-pan-india...

sokoloff 12y ago

I'm having a hard time figuring out the legal theory under which Uber should be responsible for the illegal act of an Uber driver, even if that driver were judged to be an employee (contrary to Uber's claims & TOS). If I were to rape someone, would my employer be liable? If I were a "legit" cab driver and raped someone, would the cab company be liable? If I were staying in a Marriott and got raped by a hotel staffer, would Marriott be liable? Same case in airbnb. Do people really think that online companies have a higher duty of care or liability than offline equivalents?

sn3twork 12y ago
I mean I can easily think of a reason in which they should be responsible. If they weren't doing background checks on their employees, or ignoring results from those, or not being thorough in them?
- clinta 12y ago
  I'm not a lawyer and can't comment on if they are liable or not, but I take issue with the idea that they should be. Adding this liability just compounds the current issues where felons are nearly incapable of becoming employed after serving their sentence. If the state determines that a person is safe enough to the general public to be released from prison, why should an employer be expected to investigate beyond that? On the flip side, if a person is a significant threat, the state should be liable for letting them out of prison, not the employer who hired them.
greenyoda 12y ago
"even if that driver were judged to be an employee (contrary to Uber's claims & TOS)" If a company's claims and TOS are contrary to local law, they're meaningless. A company doesn't get to determine whether their people are legally considered to be contractors or employees. In the U.S., at least, that's determined by federal labor laws, which have specific criteria based on how the job is carried out (e.g., how much autonomy the worker has in performing their job).[1] "If I were a 'legit' cab driver and raped someone, would the cab company be liable?" Let's assume that the crime occurred while the driver was on the job, driving the cab. If there were local laws stating that cab drivers needed to pass certain background checks to be hired, and the company didn't perform those checks, then the company could be liable. In NYC, for example, a criminal background check is required for a driver to get a Taxi & Limousine Commission license (these cover medallion cabs and other FHVs - for-hire vehicles).[2] If Uber has drivers who are not licensed taxi drivers, and they don't do their own background checks, it's possible that they could face legal liability if a driver committed a crime. [1] http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/docs/contractors.asp http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/docs/contractors.asp [2] http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/driver_req_checklist.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/driver_req_checkli...