Uber and Lyft attempt to exploit Texas abortion ban in falsified legal aid promotions.

Hits: 62

Uber and Lyft recently made huge and emotionally charged offers of legal aid to their drivers in an attempt to sway public support. The only problem with the offer being, that it is entirely falsified and neither Uber or Lyft maintain any actual liability or truth in the offer or any claims relating to it.

This is nothing more than another very cruel and poorly timed attempt to win back customer and investor support for two companies that owe their entire livelihood to deception and the exploitation of human suffering.

Uber and Lyft both maintain a long record of fraudulent claims in advertisements to customers, promotional partner businesses and promotional claims to their drivers.

Resulting in numerous class action lawsuits against both companies, going back as far as both companies have been in business.

Uber’s class action lawsuit record:

https://topclassactions.com/page/1/?s=uber

Lyft’s class action lawsuit record:

https://topclassactions.com/page/1/?s=lyft

In many cases on both record listings, you will find combined lawsuits involving BOTH companies for routine violations concerning fraudulent promotional claims, sexual assaults against customers and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

At the end of August, A California judge ruled that Proposition 22 is unconstitutional in it’s treatment of worker’s rights.

Proposition 22 was a law written for California’s legislation by gig economy lobbies, which altered the classification of gig workers from employees or independent contractors, to indentured contract workers who would have no actual rights to employment or independent contracting.

Uber and Lyft spent over $185 million dollars in lobbying to get proposition 22 passed in the California legislation.

This is the largest amount of money ever recorded to have been spend on legislation by large corporations in California.

Without the ability to maintain drivers as indentured under fraudulent contracting in the most influential tech business states of the US, Uber and Lyft stocks have begun a rapid decline.

Both stock listings for Uber and Lyft are now far below their opening valuations and declining rapidly.

Uber and Lyft have often utilized public tragedy as a means to exploit falsified and glamorized media promotions offering services or assistance both companies either never actually gave or would not have to give. Both companies have routinely exploited their own drivers and customers with racist and discriminatory policies.

Examples:

https://www.salon.com/2017/06/05/uber-took-too-long-to-disable-surge-pricing-during-london-attacks-critics/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/29/uber-lyft-racist-business-model-prop-22

In a recent article, Ride Safe did more in depth research into the worker contracting promotional liability, advertisement liability and back ground check liabilities of Uber, Lyft and other gig/app companies operating in the ‘gig economy’ model of business.

Each and EVERY contract agreement held by gig/app companies with their workers, drivers, promotional partners and customers maintains clear terms which invalidate the accountability of:

-Insurance coverage

-Promotional claims

-Advertisement claims

-Background check systems

-Disability services

-Claims made to the media

The recent Texas abortion ban offered Uber and Lyft yet another opportunity to exploit public tragedy in order to establish the falsified idea that they would be helping the public during a crisis.

Despite the fact that the ruling DOES NOT effect any transportation driver if they provide and happen to be reported for the provision of any ride to or from a planned parenthood clinic or other clinic offering abortion services.

Not only does this make Uber and Lyft’s offer entirely meaningless but it insults the efforts of those who may see this as some progressive offering by either company to actually combat the legislation to ban abortion.

Texas state legislation has been a long time proponent of the gig economy business model.

When the more progressive city legislation of Austin Texas deemed rideshare companies to unfair to drivers and unfairly selective to customers, the Texas state legislature gladly passed state wide legislation to override that of Austin.

It is yet to reveal itself if this latest attempt at public deception will convince customers and share holders to reconsider rideshare companies.

Related posts

Leave a Comment