Blog

 
     

Uber CEO Labels Fingerprint Background Checks as 'Unjust'

By Michael Klazema on 6/28/2016

Uber is currently in the midst of numerous background check-related conflicts all over the country. The company, which runs in-house background checks on its drivers, is resisting city or county requirements for additional background checks and licensing in multiple U.S. cities. Most recently, the ridesharing service has objected to running fingerprint background checks on its drivers. Uber has pulled its business out of several cities following the passing of ordinances that would have demanded driver fingerprinting. Austin, Texas is one of several cities that no longer have Uber services due to new background check laws.

Over the past two years, Uber has made several different arguments against fingerprinting. First, since Uber already vets its drivers, company leaders believe it is redundant to require another layer of checks. Second, the company has said that the cost and length of time necessary to process fingerprint checks will scare drivers away from the service. Uber's CEO laid forth another grievance against fingerprint background checks recently, calling them "unjust." Speaking at the Global Entrepreneurship Summit in Palo Alto, CA, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick said that fingerprint background checks make it so that falsely accused people can't get jobs. He connected this claim to Uber's reluctance to obey city and county policies that demand driver fingerprinting.

“Imagine a country where people might get arrested who shouldn’t get arrested," Kalanick said. "Imagine if that country were the U.S. We have systems in place where if you’re arrested, you literally can’t get work, even if you’re found to be innocent. And it’s unjust.”

According to other sources, Kalanick may have overstated the relationship between arrests and employment disqualification. Employers are not barred from hiring applicants with arrest histories. While the FBI fingerprint database does store both arrest and conviction information, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) strongly recommends that employers do not take arrest histories into account when vetting job applicants. Since arrests without convictions offer no proof of guilt, they are not a reliable barometer to use in judging an applicant's character. As such, there is no scenario in which Uber would be required to disqualify a prospective driver because of an arrest record. In fact, the company would risk lawsuits or other potential trouble from the EEOC if they were to use arrests to inform employment decisions.

Largely because of the EEOC's stance on using arrest records in hiring decisions, most background checks do not include arrest information. Even fingerprint background checks can exclude these findings. Regardless of whether or not Uber's fingerprint checks included arrest information, the company would not be bound to use findings for employment decisions.

Sources:

http://wtkr.com/2016/06/23/uber-ceo-explains-why-he-thinks-fingerprinting-drivers-is-unjust/

http://www.fingerprinting.com/background-check.php


Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • December 04 Chicago Public Schools has dismissed hundreds of employees, coaches, vendors, and volunteers based on background check findings. The district recently vowed to re-check the majority of its 68,000 employees after a Chicago Tribune investigation revealed holes in its background check policies.
  • November 29 Striving to create a safer environment more conducive to productive training and leadership development, the Army has recently moved to adopt a uniform policy of background checks for certain roles. 
  • November 27 California’s biggest public school district is waiving the cost of volunteer background checks. The move is meant to encourage more family - and community members to get involved with the school district.
  • November 22 Contractors play an important role in the workforce, delivering services to both individuals and organizations. Vetting contractors for suitability continues to be a challenge, as two recent articles prove.
  • November 21 When it comes to background and pre-employment checks, it can be instructive to look at the characteristics of the ten most massive U.S. employers.
  • November 20 The #MeToo movement is bringing about legislative changes employers need to know about. We review some of the laws recently passed in California.
  • November 19

    Will a criminal conviction show up on your background check forever? In most states, there is a year limit for how long background check companies can report older criminal information.


  • November 15

    Replacing an inconsistent array of procedures, Ontario's government has passed into law a reform act intended to clarify how police departments should handle requests for information to be used in background checks. 


  • November 14 The federal government has vowed to cut its backlog of security clearance background checks in half by spring. Currently, the backlog is approximately 600,000 names strong.
  • November 12 To ensure the best hires, DFWSPF has implemented a stringent employee screening process—one that includes background searches through backgroundchecks.com.