Tampa Bay Area Residents Fighting Against Pending Ridesharing Regulations

By Michael Klazema on 9/19/2016

Tampa Bay is just one step away from being the latest county in the United States to mandate additional background checks for ridesharing drivers. According to a report from the Tampa Bay Business Journal, the Hillsborough County Public Transportation Commission is nearing a vote that would further regulate companies like Uber and Lyft. Among the pending requirements are fingerprint background checks for all drivers—the same regulation that has caused Uber and Lyft to abandon several cities throughout the country.

Background checks aren't the only regulation that could be coming down the pipeline toward ridesharing businesses. The Public Transportation Commission wants vehicle inspections of all cars used for ridesharing purposes as well as minimum wait times and fares. The commission is thinking about imposing a "maximum driver limit" for each ridesharing company, a regulation that would aim to bar companies like Uber and Lyft from becoming monopolistic in the area.

Administrators believe that these regulations are in the interest of public safety. Currently, Uber and Lyft use drivers' names and birthdates to process background checks. The Public Transportation Commission claims that adding fingerprints would help detect criminal backgrounds and keep predators and dangerous drivers off the roads and away from potential victims. Uber and Lyft have customarily argued that fingerprint background checks have a disproportionate impact on minorities. The companies contend that such background checks also aren't entirely fair because they often detect arrest histories rather than just returning conviction histories.

Uber has promised to leave the Tampa Bay area if these new regulations are imposed upon Hillsborough County ridesharing operations. Lyft has not provided a statement.

Residents who want to keep Uber and Lyft in the Tampa Bay area are fighting back against the Public Transportation Commission. There is currently a petition on urging local elected officials to "Save Uber & Lyft in Tampa!" The petition is directed toward the members of the PTC as well as Bob Buckhorn, the mayor of Tampa. The petition's author is encouraging officials to "stop feeding into special interests and ruining our access to ridesharing services in Hillsborough County." Currently, the petition has more than 800 signatures.

The petition doesn't mention fingerprint background checks, which have historically been a sticking point for Uber and Lyft. Rather, the petition takes issue with the minimum fare and minimum wait time regulations. "It's clear that you are not acting in a public safety role but rather attempting to 'level the playing field' for limo/taxi special interests," the petition's author accuses. The suggestion is that the PTC is forcing ridesharing companies to reduce the economical nature and overall quality of their services so that other transportation companies in the area can stay competitive.

The PTC's impending vote will determine the future of ridesharing services in the Tampa Bay area.


Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.