Uber let convicted rapists, burglars and murderers drive passengers, court hears

Uber’s background checks depend on private figuring out info, not fingerprints, based on the lawsuit filed final yr by San Francisco District Lawyer George Gascon and his Los Angeles counterpart, Jackie Lacy.

One driver was convicted of second-degree murder in Los Angeles in 1982, and spent 26 years in prison before being paroled in 2008.

In another case cited by the complaint, a driver had been convicted of the felony of “committing lewd or lascivious acts against a child under 14”, which didn’t turn up on the background check. Uber’s background check apparently failed to identify him as a registered sex offender, which sparked an worldwide criticism about the company’s approach on passenger safety.

Matt McKenna, an Uber spokesman, said the Temple University study only bolsters similar data previously collected by Uber and Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the nation’s largest nonprofit working to protect people from drunken driving and underage drinking. Earlier in August Uber won the dismissal of a racketeering lawsuit brought by 15 Connecticut taxi and limousine companies seeking to stop Uber from doing business in the state.

“Uber’s representations concerning the quality of its background check process are untrue or misleading”.

Uber, not surprisingly, has pushed back against the latest claim.

Delaney, who represents employers in labor arbitrations, says that while fingerprinting wouldn’t necesarily provide enough fodder to nudge drivers into classifications as employees, she imagines it’s an idea that has crossed the minds of Uber’s legal team.

A recent amendment to a lawsuit filed against Uber previous year indicates that the ride-hailing app’s screening process for prospective drivers is far from foolproof, the Los Angeles Times reports.

A recent sexual assault allegation against a Charleston-area Uber driver hasn’t deterred some female riders from wanting to use the transit service.

But, Uber spokesperson Jessica Santillo argued that no background check system could be totally flawless and that the company ran background checks of hundreds of drivers and uncovered convictions for DUI, rape, attempted murder and violence. State Sen. Larry Grooms, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee and one of the leaders in getting a bill regulating Uber through the Legislature this summer, said people take risks whenever they leave their safety up to others.

The DA is going after Uber becuase it says it is fooling the public by saying it has the best background check the law allows.

The corporate says on its web site that whereas there are advantages to utilizing biometric identification, LiveScan isn’t 100 per cent correct.