Please note that new posts in this forum must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible.
| Thread Review (Newest First) |
| Posted by Donesia - 07-05-2022, 01:20 PM |
|
Here is a previous case by *** (Identity withheld for privacy reasons). In April 2022, I was sent an email from Shipt HQ informing me that I had been deactivated from the platform for alleged violations of the terms of service as outlined the independent contractor agreement that I had entered into when I started working as a shopper / delivery driver on the platform about a year prior. At the end of this email was a link to an appeal form that I filled out a few days after deactivation, offering my side of the story and explanations for why I believe I was terminated unjustly (I explained that the algorithms used to detect possible fraudulent behavior were not calibrated correctly, and that an actual human review of my data would show that there was no reason to deactivate me.) I never once heard back from Shipt, despite numerous requests for an update via phone and email in the weeks that followed the appeal. I went as far as to mail their legal department in San Francisco a certified letter explaining that I was prepared to initiate formal arbitration proceedings (as provided in the aforementioned agreement) if they were not willing to provide me an audience to discuss my sudden deactivation; the letter was ultimately sent back to me after they refused to accept delivery of it on multiple occasions. I am wondering if I have any recourse in the matter, given the fact that they don't appear to be willing at all to engage in a good faith exchange. Please note that there is a clause in the agreement that stipulates that SHIPT and I "mutually agree to resolve any justiciable disputes, past, present, or future, between the Parties, or between [me] and any of SHIPT's employees, agents, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, or assigns, exclusively through binding arbitration instead of a court or jury trial." If it makes any difference, I am located in California, a state in which I may still be protected by Prop 22 (2020), which grants certain rights and protections for app-based drivers like myself; the Proposition was ruled unconstitutional in August 2021, but is currently going through the appeals process. Status: arbitration |