National Limousine Association Calls for Better Background Checks at Uber and Lyft

By Michael Klazema on 2/13/2018
The National Limousine Association (NLA) is calling on ridesharing services such as Uber and Lyft to improve their background check policies. According to a recent press release from the NLA, the association is “renewing” its campaign against the ridesharing industry. The association has fought for stricter background checks at companies such as Uber and Lyft over the years, but the release suggests a redoubling of efforts going forward.

The NLA is calling for legislation to require ridesharing companies to conduct fingerprint-based background checks on all drivers.The association also wants drug screenings to be a standard part of the rideshare background screening process.

The announcement from the NLA comes in the wake of a recent PSA that the organization produced in collaboration with the nonprofit organization Promoting Awareness, Victim Empowerment (or PAVE). The PSA features actress and model Pamela Anderson and suggests a recent flood of sexual assault allegations against rideshare drivers may have been the result of lax background check policies. Anderson herself is a survivor of rape and sexual abuse.

Uber and Lyft responded to the PSA from NLA and PAVE, downplaying the suggestion their background checks were ineffective. Both services said their background checks do plenty to ensure the safety of passengers. The NLA refuted that claim in the press release, alleging ridesharing companies have “missed thousands of drivers with criminal backgrounds” and have had to dismiss considerable portions of their workforce as a result.

Speaking on the issue, NLA President Gary Buffo said a truly “comprehensive” background check process for ridesharing drivers would include fingerprint-based checks and find convictions “many years back and across state lines.” Buffo called for ridesharing companies to implement in-person interviews and drug and alcohol screening policies—both things that neither Uber or Lyft do currently. Buffo suggested the lack of drug screenings in ridesharing is irresponsible given the nation’s opioid crisis.

In the past, Uber and Lyft have both fought back against any campaign for expanded background checks. Both companies rely in part on ease and accessibility to fill out their workforces. Individuals can easily sign up to become drivers for either service if they want to make extra money accepting fares. Uber background check requirements include driver’s license and Motor Vehicle Record checks and disqualifies drivers who have been convicted of felonies, sexual offenses, or violent crimes in the last seven years.

Ridesharing companies have repeatedly come under fire for not doing enough to protect their passengers—and not just from the NLA. Last year, California legislators deliberated a bill that would have required fingerprinting for ridesharing companies. The bill didn’t pass. Previously, Uber and Lyft abandoned Austin, Texas after the city implemented a fingerprint requirement. When statewide regulatory legislation undid the local rule a year later, both ridesharing companies resumed service in Austin.


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.