Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
1–10 of 63 posts
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#2[deleted]
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#3Agreements made under duress or where there is a significant imbalance of power aren't enforceable. I'd say a car jacking meets both standards.
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#4Agreements made under duress or where there is a significant imbalance of power aren't enforceable. I'd say a car jacking meets both standards.
Can you expand? Under what conditions and by what precedent are they not enforceable (and for what purposes?). Does this apply to law enforcement interrogations? Or doctor / patient medical emergencies?
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#5This really goes back to the debate if Uber is a marketing platform for individual drivers (like Facebook marketplace), or is it a transportation company which employs a bunch of drivers.
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#6Uber tried to compensate this independent contractor when they had no legal reason to do so. The contractors assume all legal risk when they work as an independent contractor, which is why many contractors in other industries often form an LLC so their assets are shielded from liability.
On top of this, NDAs are common in arbitration. They were under no legal requirement to sign.
Plus, compensating drivers a ton for carjacking creates perverse incentives. It would be trivial for a driver's buddy to "carjack" them on camera and seek a payout from it.
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#7If Uber gave tracking devices for drivers to hide in cars, then thieves and carjackers could easily be caught up with by authorities before they get a chance to disassemble the car and find the tracker.
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#8Shouldn’t an event like this be covered by insurance? I assume the driver did not have commercial insurance and wants Uber to be responsible, which goes back to the independent contractor vs employee debate?
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#9Agreements made under duress or where there is a significant imbalance of power aren't enforceable. I'd say a car jacking meets both standards.
Can you expand? Under what conditions and by what precedent are they not enforceable (and for what purposes?). Does this apply to law enforcement interrogations? Or doctor / patient medical emergencies?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress_in_American_law
I don't think it really applies here, since the duress (the carjacking incident) came well after the legal agreement (the driver accepting Uber's TOS).
I think it's that any agreement the driver made with the carjacker would qualify as an agreement made under duress and would be unenforceable.
Re: Uber requires nondisclosure agreement before compensating carjacked driver
#10Agreements made under duress or where there is a significant imbalance of power aren't enforceable. I'd say a car jacking meets both standards.
Can you expand? Under what conditions and by what precedent are they not enforceable (and for what purposes?). Does this apply to law enforcement interrogations? Or doctor / patient medical emergencies?
I think this is a great question, as there are many such circumstances across a broad spectrum. If there's some legal point to pivot on (e.g. imminent physical harm) it would be good to know.