Rideshare apps Uber and Lyft are battling thousands of injury and sexual assault lawsuits. A must-pass transportation bill in Congress includes an industry-friendly carveout that would give the companies legal immunity from car crashes and injuries.

Why would any work towards making their tech better when you can just free yourself from the consequences of its mistakes.

    • Akh@lemmy.world
      225·
      2 months ago

      Eh, this actually makes sense. It is a lot like the graves amendment for rental car companies.

      For better or worse, ride share is a pretty important part of society now and making them responsible for every crash involving their drivers is eh.

      They are liable for gross negligence

      • mushroommunk@lemmy.today
        221·
        2 months ago

        Or, maybe we hold corporations accountable for their outsized impact on society?

        The company has billions of dollars available. They can be liable for crashes involving their drivers. You’re using a “too big to fail” adjacent argument that makes no sense

        • Akh@lemmy.world
          18·
          2 months ago

          I do not necessarily disagree, I think they should be taxed to all hell and resources used to improve infrastructure. I am just saying if an uber driver runs a red light, may not be anything Uber can do about it

          • mushroommunk@lemmy.today
            16·
            2 months ago

            Taxi companies found a way. Just because a tech monopoly wants to say they’re different doesn’t actually mean they are. They can use that money to properly screen and train drivers and only once a best effort has been made (which again taxi companies have shown can be done) do they get lessened liability.

            But agreed 100% on the tax them into the ground and build public infrastructure instead idea. Loads of people love trolleys and trains, never see anyone get excited about an Uber or a Lyft

            • Akh@lemmy.world
              18·
              2 months ago

              Right but taxi companies did it the same way mcdonad’s did. Franchises…

              • mushroommunk@lemmy.today
                6·
                2 months ago

                Franchising changes how expansion is financed. It doesn’t magically change liability or operational requirements and is not relevant

                • Akh@lemmy.world
                  14·
                  2 months ago

                  Yes it does, mcdonald’s is not liable for a slip and fall at a franchise location.

                  • mushroommunk@lemmy.today
                    4·
                    2 months ago

                    That’s factually incorrect. Look up Vicarious Liability suits which are are exactly that. A lawsuit where an injured party believes the franchisor is at least partially responsible due to various things which can include negligence in safety standards imposed on the franchisee. As with all law it gets complicated fast but there are definitely ways to hold McDonald’s accountable for things at a franchise location. They aren’t magically free.

                  • red_green_black@slrpnk.netEnglish
                    4·
                    2 months ago

                    Maybe but the franchise location still suffers the risk of getting shut down because the corporation doesn’t want to deal with the lawsuits. Or did you think that safety requirements where not in the Franchise agreements?

          • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
            11·
            2 months ago

            I am just saying if an uber driver runs a red light, may not be anything Uber can do about it

            I am just saying if a factory employee ignores some safety checks, may not be anything the factory owner can do about it

            I am just saying if a surgeon leaves a glove in a patient, may not be anything the hospital can do about it

            Companies create the incentive structures, checks, and balances that drive their employees to take certain actions. Factories that don’t leave enough time for workers to do their due diligence cause workers to ignore safety checks. Hospitals that pay surgeons to work overtime cause surgeons to make mistakes from inattention. Rideshare companies that pay drivers depending on how quickly they get people from point A to point B cause drivers to disobey traffic laws.

            At the very least, legal responsibility for crashes and traffic law breaking is an incentive for rideshare companies to change their drivers’ incentive structure in order to promote save driving. It doesn’t have to be a moral assignment of guilt, just a way for society to have fewer road deaths because of market forces.

          • red_green_black@slrpnk.netEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            Uber could provide training and if there are drivers being reckless of their own accord face a risk of getting banned (fired of you will) from being a driver.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        12·
        2 months ago

        So, if any company contracts our their work, are they no longer liable? Or is ot just rideshare? In that case, why would any company keep liability by having employees?

        Sure, uber are at risk from having de facto employees cause damage. They could prioritise safe driving and do proper training. Instead they just churn through drivers who eventually realise its not worth it.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        5·
        2 months ago

        Ride-sharing was setup just so they could legally squeeze the drivers to hell and back, and specifically to indeed shield themselves from legal liabilities. This problem exists only by design.

        If this doesnt work for the companies them maybe the entire ride-sharing is a bad idea to begin with because not always was a bad idea to begin with

        Ban ride sharing

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          11·
          2 months ago

          I dont think ride sharing shoikd be banned. It provides some benefits for riders, and for drivers. However, it also carries risks and has shifted costs and liabilities. That should be corrected, legally. Similar for airbnb and the whole gig economy.