More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#2> “Thousands of people in Massachusetts have lost access to economic opportunities as a result of a screening that includes an unfair and unjust indefinite look-back period,” an Uber spokeswoman said today. “We have an opportunity to repair the current system in the rules process so that people who deserve to work are not denied the opportunity.”
Given all of the negative press about Uber lately, you'd think they'd give some more thought before publicly defending the right of sex offenders, people with suspended licenses, and people with multiple serious driving offenses to work as taxi drivers.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#3> The most common reason for rejecting a potential driver was a suspended license [on their record]
A previously suspended license flunks the background check? I've had mine suspended for failing to pay a parking ticket that was never mailed to me. Kind of a lame reason to never be able to drive for lyft or uber.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#4It's crazy that Uber would make such a fuss about this and characterize it as merely a matter of depriving putative drivers of income. Yes, there will almost certainly be instances in which the indefinite look-back period or criminal history criteria would lead to an arguably unfair outcome for a particular driver. However, surely that would be an issue for only a very small proportion of people. Even if it isn't, I can't help but take the utilitarian approach and err on the side of caution.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#5It's crazy that Uber would make such a fuss about this and characterize it as merely a matter of depriving putative drivers of income. Yes, there will almost certainly be instances in which the indefinite look-back period or criminal history criteria would lead to an arguably unfair outcome for a particular driver. However, surely that would be an issue for only a very small proportion of people. Even if it isn't, I…
8000 employees for uber in a single state is not a small proportion.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#6> The most common reason for rejecting a potential driver was a suspended license [on their record] A previously suspended license flunks the background check? I've had mine suspended for failing to pay a parking ticket that was never mailed to me. Kind of a lame reason to never be able to drive for lyft or uber.
No, they were rejected because they don't currently have an active license.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#7I will take this with a grain of salt given the excessive criminalisation of ordinary behaviour. Even for horrible terms like "sex offender" we can not be sure if the guy was a rapist or someone getting a happy ending in massage parlour.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#8It's crazy that Uber would make such a fuss about this and characterize it as merely a matter of depriving putative drivers of income. Yes, there will almost certainly be instances in which the indefinite look-back period or criminal history criteria would lead to an arguably unfair outcome for a particular driver. However, surely that would be an issue for only a very small proportion of people. Even if it isn't, I…
8000 employees for uber in a single state is not a small proportion.
I suspect they got many people who can't become Taxi etc drivers due to these issues and lack higher paying skills.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#9Indefinite look back periods deprive people with decades-old convictions from doing honest work for honest pay. This is counterproductive to society.
Re: More than 8,000 ride-share drivers flunked Mass. background checks
#10> “Thousands of people in Massachusetts have lost access to economic opportunities as a result of a screening that includes an unfair and unjust indefinite look-back period,” an Uber spokeswoman said today. “We have an opportunity to repair the current system in the rules process so that people who deserve to work are not denied the opportunity.” Given all of the negative press about Uber lately, you'd think they'd g…
I will defend the right of sex offenders, people with suspended licenses etc. unless I know the specific crime for which they were convicted. A person pissing in a bush can become a sexual offender, an 18 year old kid having sex with 16 year old girlfriend can become sex offender. People might get their license suspended because of economic hardship.
Putting all these people in same bracket as a brazen criminal is a bad idea.