It's not like he had a right to challenge him, he had an opportunity, which he took.

> You don't get to challenge everyone in your life who makes decisions that directly or indirectly affect you.

Where did you get that idea?

Well, yes, you do. At least, there's generally no reason why you couldn't challenge them. No guarantee they'll listen.

> You don't get to challenge everyone in your life who makes decisions that directly or indirectly affect you.

I believe the first amendment disagrees. If you have a grievance with someone, it is absolutely within your right to tell them. In fact, I'd argue that a healthy, functional society relies entirely on people being completely honest with each other.

Hypothetically, don't you think a world where you could do that would be better? Besides this isn't exactly indirect. There is a direct line from Kalanick's decisions to this mans paycheck.