Blog

 
     

Oregon Bill Would Allow Ridesharing Organizations to Operate Statewide

By Michael Klazema on 4/10/2017

According to its critics, a bill currently pending in the Oregon House of Representatives could make it more difficult for municipalities to govern ridesharing activities in the state.

Per a report from KATU News, House Bill 3246 would create a “statewide transportation network” in Oregon. Uber currently only operates “in the Portland metro area and surrounding cities” according to Bryce Bennett, who serves as general manager for the transportation company in Oregon.

As coverage explains, most cities have the freedom to regulate companies like Uber and Lyft as they see fit. If ridesharing businesses fail to meet local rules and regulations—such as mandatory fingerprint background checks for drivers—they are not permitted to operate in those areas. Uber and Lyft made headlines when they left Austin, Texas entirely after the city imposed a fingerprint background check law for ridesharing services.

Instead of letting local municipalities regulate ridesharing services, the bill would impose statewide regulations on companies like Uber and Lyft, reports explain. Ridesharing companies would have to register with the Department of Consumer and Business Services, run background checks on their drivers, and ensure that each driver has required insurance coverage.

The bill is not without controversy. Dan Saltzman, the Portland City Commissioner, claims the bill would make it difficult for municipal governments to tweak policies in accordance with community needs. A state representative challenged Uber’s Bryce Bennett when he argued that Uber’s existing background checks are stronger than a fingerprint check through the FBI database. Bennett defended Uber’s checks, saying that they are “three-pronged” to incorporate driving history, Social Security Numbers for address changes and “closed court cases,” and sex offender history. Margaret Doherty, a State Representative, said she was “appalled” that Bennett didn’t think his drivers needed fingerprint background checks as well.

Per coverage, Uber officials have previously suggested that long processing times for FBI database checks would serve as a barrier to entry for drivers who might otherwise consider working for Uber.

Sources: http://katu.com/news/local/bill-would-allow-uber-lyft-to-operate-statewide-in-oregon

Industry News

Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • April 10 — Oregon legislators have proposed a bill that would allow ridesharing companies to operate statewide. The bill’s critics argue that it doesn’t call for fingerprint background checks and would make it difficult for local municipalities to impose their own regulations.
  • April 06 — Idaho State University recently instituted a background check policy for faculty members and other full-time staff. Previously, the school only conducted reference checks.
  • April 03 — An Illinois man has been sentenced to three years in prison for failing to register as a sex offender and working as a youth sports referee. The state legislature is considering a bill that would require more in-depth background checks for licensed sporting officials.
  • March 13 — A Denver hospital was in the headlines last year for hiring a surgery technician who stole syringes of the painkiller fentanyl. New information suggests that a more thorough background check could have flagged the man’s addiction issues.
  • March 08 — On September 26, 2016, the state of California passed Assembly Bill 1843 that amended the Labor Code by prohibiting employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose certain juvenile records. The amended Labor Code has been effective since January 1, 2017.
  • March 08 — For the past 5 years, backgroundchecks.com has reported rulings of district courts around the country that have ruled that an employer’s inclusion of a liability waiver or other extraneous information in a disclosure violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s (“FCRA”) disclosure requirements found in §604(b)(2)(a). Now, for the first time, a federal court of appeals has weighed in on the disclosure requirement.
  • March 07 — The Kentucky State Senate has approved a piece of legislation that would open the state’s child abuse and neglect registry to schools, camps, and parents. If passed, the law would allow anyone to request a search of the database.
  • March 06 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • March 05 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • February 21 — In January, a Washington, D.C. contractor was fired for being reckless with confidential patient files. The woman had a criminal record with two felony convictions, but a local background check did not list the offenses.