They're kinda weird positions in this instance, is the problem. To the first one, yeah, mob justice isn't great. But is this dude facing mob justice? Who even is he? Do you know? I certainly don't. Who has gone after this guy?
-
-
Replying to @eggynack @arthur_affect and
If the answer is that no one has any idea who this guy is or has done anything directly angled at him, then this isn't mob justice. The only justice that's occurred is that the dude was reported for breaking the law and got fired over it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eggynack @arthur_affect and
Which gets to the second thing. Yeah, Uber is an evil corporation. But what are they supposed to do here? It's not like they could have changed the situation by informing him that this was breaking the law. He knew full well, because he was explicitly told so.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eggynack @arthur_affect and
Are we just arbitrarily mad at Uber for not being as much in the direct line of fire regarding this law? Cause if that's the problem then there're limits to Uber's influence, and I honestly have no idea how else the law could be designed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @eggynack @arthur_affect and
Cause the way I would think it'd be designed, the only way that's plausible, is that the company is liable for breaches of the law in question. Is that not how it is? Cause that seems likely how it is. This Uber driver isn't getting sued for this, y'know?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eggynack @arthur_affect and
So, we're just mad at Uber for taking action to protect themselves from liability because one of their workers broke the law in a way which hurt a member of an oppressed class? Are those not the conditions under which we expect a firing?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
No, what she said was that in this case four drivers were reported, one got terminated and three got a warning
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I don't know why he was fired Maybe it's because they freaked out because he was in a viral video Maybe it's because the video explicitly shows him being told about the ADA requirement and him flatly refusing to comply with it, removing ignorance as an excuse in court
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Maybe it's because this isn't the first incident with him Who knows But hey - if nobody ever actually gets fired for discrimination then you don't actually have a policy against discrimination
-
-
Exactly. What does a "change in policy" even mean here? The policy should be that drivers aren't allowed to break these laws. That is apparently their policy.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.