> He's normally entitled to $0 from uber, which means he's getting paid $1000 for the NDA.
Entitled or not, that would still leave him getting barely even after the entire experience. That does not provide one with a happy person.
> No, because he's working as a independent contractor and therefore is expected to be on his when it comes to costs/losses
A contractor who can't run a good risk analysis on his job because the company that hired him has a habit of handing out NDAs to anyone who ever ran into trouble while working for them. Now I am not a lawyer, but could that be spun into dropping at least some of the blame at Uber?
The situation sucks, but I fail to see why he should be compensated by uber. Should your employer compensate you if your car got stolen on your way to work?
>A contractor who can't run a good risk analysis on his job because the company that hired him has a habit of handing out NDAs to anyone who ever ran into trouble while working for them.
It seems reasonable that the carjackers are the ones who are responsible for paying out.
But as Uber created the transaction between the two parties, it also seems reasonable that Uber should be responsible for getting recompense from the carjacker. Basically that would imply:
- Driver uses insurance to be covered quickly.
- Driver and/or insurance have Uber cover full damages.
- Uber goes after carjacker to be made whole (I don’t expect the carjackers to have any assets, but Uber ought to be able to get a legal judgement anyways).
Even if that’s not the law today, I think a legal framework that allowed you to get compensated from a broker responsible for your interaction would place the incentives in the right places.
>But as Uber created the transaction between the two parties, it also seems reasonable that Uber should be responsible for getting recompense from the carjacker
In other words, the party facilitating the transaction should also provide escrow/insurance? I'd agree it's nice if the facilitator did that, but absent any explicit guarantees by the facilitator, I'm not sure why that would create a legal obligation for them to do that.
>Even if that’s not the law today, I think a legal framework that allowed you to get compensated from a broker responsible for your interaction would place the incentives in the right places.
I'm failing to see how this actually prevents cases like this. Is the passenger a serial carjacker or something? Is uber refusing to cooperate with police? To me this feels less "place the incentives in the right places" and more "pass the buck to uber because they're big and bad".
Entitled or not, that would still leave him getting barely even after the entire experience. That does not provide one with a happy person.
> No, because he's working as a independent contractor and therefore is expected to be on his when it comes to costs/losses
A contractor who can't run a good risk analysis on his job because the company that hired him has a habit of handing out NDAs to anyone who ever ran into trouble while working for them. Now I am not a lawyer, but could that be spun into dropping at least some of the blame at Uber?