Uber and Lyft Create a Shared Database of Drivers Banned For Assault (engadget.com) 124
Uber and Lyft will work together to share information on US drivers and delivery people accused of physical and sexual assault to ensure those individuals are banned on both platforms, the two companies announced on Thursday in separate blog posts. Engadget reports: HireRight, a company that specializes in conducting background checks, will oversee the Industry Sharing Safety Program database. Other transportation and delivery companies in the US will have the chance to contribute and access the database as long as they adhere to the same data accuracy and privacy policies that Uber and Lyft must follow.
"We want to share this information with each other and hopefully in the near future with other companies, so that our peers in this space can be informed and make decisions for their own platforms to keep those platforms safe," Jennifer Brandenburger, Lyft's head of policy development, told NBC News. The database won't include information on victims. Additionally, the incident that landed a driver in the database will fall in broad categories.
"We want to share this information with each other and hopefully in the near future with other companies, so that our peers in this space can be informed and make decisions for their own platforms to keep those platforms safe," Jennifer Brandenburger, Lyft's head of policy development, told NBC News. The database won't include information on victims. Additionally, the incident that landed a driver in the database will fall in broad categories.
Accused? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
There is, but not what you think it is.
In North America, each state/province has it's own DMV, and the state/municipal police have access to this database. So for example if you have a significant number of moving offences, you lose your license and/or can not renew insurance on a vehicle. If you punch your passengers, these will not be recorded on the driving abstract.
You can get a drivers abstract straight from the DMV in most cases, and what makes the Uber/Lyft/etc unique in this respect is that someone
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Insightful)
The assaults should be reported to the police under state or even federal laws; not via the DMV. And background checks can be done across states.
These private databases are going to become judge & jury to some sections of our society. This is not right, past crimes should not deem you unfit for employment if society has forgiven you and/or you have done your time.
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Interesting)
Something like that happened in the UK. There was a secret list of "troublemakers" in the construction industry. Not just those accused of crimes, but people who were active with unions or who complained about health and safety issues.
It was eventually discovered and some compensation awarded to people placed on it.
Re: (Score:2)
There was also one about childcare, where you needed to register yourself to be able to care for even neighbours kids. And the accusation of any impropriety meant no, you couldn't look after anyone else's kids. Full stop. No access to the case, or the complainant, or the complaint. You were simply not allowed to look after kinds.
I detest systems of guilt by accusation.They're intellectually lazy, and end up as tools for the malicious to attack with.
Re: Accused? (Score:4, Informative)
IIRC the proposal was to allow anyone with a valid reason, like a parent employing a babysitter, to ask the police about that person. The police would reveal if they were considered a threat to childen.
The problem was that people found out they were on the list but couldn't find out why. The police wouldn't say, and in cases where it went to court and they did find out it was sometimes for things like allegations that weren't even investigated.
Re: (Score:2)
The assaults should be reported to the police under state or even federal laws; not via the DMV. And background checks can be done across states.
These private databases are going to become judge & jury to some sections of our society. This is not right, past crimes should not deem you unfit for employment if society has forgiven you and/or you have done your time.
I think a requirement should be that the crime was reported, and the accused allowed to contest it with the company. If the accuser fails to file a police report then that is their choice but you can't blacklist a driver for that.
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Then perhaps the easiest solution is to not commit the crime in the first place"
The idea is this kind of system will penalize even wrongfully accused or wrongfully condemned people.
Even though the justice system of the U S of A is glorious and great, it too makes its own share of mistakes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really want to do business with a company like this. Did they stop teaching The Crucible in English class? Have these people never heard of the Salem witch trials?
Destroying someone's career based on an accusation that wasn't rigorously tried and convicted in a court of law is wrong. Filing an accusation with Lyft or Uber without calling the cops is unconscionable.
I know this is aimed at making women feel secure, but honestly... you women know what you're like, do you not?
Next time you're about t
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Insightful)
A blacklist is just that - a blacklist. Piss off the wrong person? They can put you on it. Be accused of something by a vindictive liar? They can put you on it.
Blacklists are BAD. You can appeal a court verdict. You can't appeal when some asshole in HR gets a burr up their backside because you divorced their sister.
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Informative)
To be convicted of a crime, you need to either be accused of it and not contest it (like a traffic ticket) or go in front of a judge / jury and be convicted of it.
I was charged with a crime and the charge was later dropped. "Nolle Prosequi". A formal notice of abandonment by a prosecutor of all or part of a suit or action.
Search my name on the state courts website and it still comes up. And always will.
Re: (Score:2)
I worked with someone who was trying to get a record sealed for an arrest. He was lucky enough that the police ended up looking at other suspects and the charges against him were dropped. (The actual perpetrator ended up serving a long prison sentence.) But last I heard, he still had an arrest record for a crime that you never want on a backgrou
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on the state, you may be able to have the charges expunged. In California, the relevant statute is Penal Code Section 851.8
Which is useless because the charges will be recorded in other databases and never removed without a specific court order.
Re: Accused? (Score:4, Insightful)
And what if you didn't commit the crime and were accused by a hostile rider? That's his point and I think he's stated this multiple times. False accusations happen all the time especially when it brings in free rides. This is why drivers have started adding cameras in their cars. This database isn't for the guilty. It's for anyone accused regardless of guilt.
Are they going to create another database of those who falsely accused drivers as well? I certainly wouldn't want to pick up those people. These ride-share companies also temporarily suspend drivers when there is a false drug or similar complaint. No thanks.Let's get a DB going there as well, where drivers can permanently blacklist passengers from ever getting another ride via mere accusations. I'm sure it won't be abused here either.
Re: Accused? (Score:4, Insightful)
Because of people like you that don't see the difference between committing a crime and being accused of committing a crime.
Re: (Score:3)
Because of people like you that don't see the difference between committing a crime and being accused of committing a crime.
I know the difference. I called your former employer, they said they fired you for $(REASON), I'm not going to hire you. This background reporting service isn't much different, they're automating the HR departments calling back and forth.
https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/a... [ftc.gov]
"Some employers try to find out about your background by hiring someone to do a “background report” on you. Among the most common are criminal background reports and credit reports. But special rules apply when an employer gets
Re: Accused? (Score:5, Informative)
If you don't commit a crime, why would you have to worry about the justice system? You wouldn't have any interaction with it.
Do you actually believe that? Lot's of people have been wrongfully accused. Especially in the arena of sexcrime.
Here's a fellow exhonerated from a murder charge that he spent 5 years in prison accused of because Hertz refused to give a receipt that showed where he was at the time of the murder: https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11... [cnn.com] Guy spent 22 years in jail for murder ad rape. Did he do it? Nope https://www.upi.com/Top_News/U... [upi.com]
Over 30 years for a murder he didn't commit: https://www.fox4news.com/news/... [fox4news.com]
Man wrongfully accused of 1988 murder in a cold case https://www.msn.com/en-us/news... [msn.com]
But back to the sexcrimes, I got tired of the cites, so here's 35 different cases of false accusation in one: https://www.dailywire.com/news... [dailywire.com]
You appear to have a faulty idea of the Justice system. Because if you support these false accusations, you also support actually guilty people getting away with their crimes, or that just getting accused is all you need.
This is why we have a justice system that at least attempts to get at the truth, despite people such as yourself getting to subvert it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't commit a crime, why would you have to worry about the justice system? You wouldn't have any interaction with it.
Do you actually believe that? Lot's of people have been wrongfully accused. Especially in the arena of sexcrime.
Here's a fellow exhonerated from a murder charge that he spent 5 years in prison accused of because Hertz refused to give a receipt that showed where he was at the time of the murder.
What I don't get is why the problem happened. If you give them an email you can get it via email, or if you are aa Gold Club member pull it of online. I've gotten Hertz receipts with a call, and his credit card company can provide proof his card was used. It just seems odd Hertz refused to provide a receipt.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't get is why the problem happened. If you give them an email you can get it via email, or if you are aa Gold Club member pull it of online. I've gotten Hertz receipts with a call, and his credit card company can provide proof his card was used. It just seems odd Hertz refused to provide a receipt.
I wonder if they had those things in 2011 Or if they do, do those online receipts show the time the vehicle was picked up? Not certain since I've never used Hertz. Hertz claims that they could not find the receipt in 2015, but apparently could find it in 2018.
I do doubt that the incident was racially related, unless Hertz has the nasty color bar on their paperwork. I suspect that some mid level manager just ignored or forgot about it. Whatever the situation, it's pretty horrifying.
Re: Accused? (Score:4, Insightful)
Rf you don't commit a crime, why would you have to worry about the justice system? You wouldn't have any interaction with it.
This doesn't involve the justice system. The justice system isn't involved in this at all. This is something set up between two companies that involves people who are accused of something but not investigated, tried, or convicted of a crime by the justice system.
Re: (Score:3)
This doesn't involve the justice system. The justice system isn't involved in this at all.
Actually, it is. An outside company is doing the background checks. Where do you think they're getting this information, by pulling it out of their ass? They're getting it the same way employers do background checks: with the police and judicial system.
This is something set up between two companies that involves people who are accused of something but not investigated, tried, or convicted of a crime by the justice sy
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it is. An outside company is doing the background checks
That is not the justice system.
No, it's not. Yes, the companies will be sharing information, but they're using the information provided by the outside company.
So, three companies instead of two. Still not the justice system.
HireRight, a company that specializes in conducting background checks, will oversee the Industry Sharing Safety Program database.
Still not the justice system. They way this system works is that a rider accuses a driver of sexual assault. The police are not called, there is no real investigation, and the driver is put on the list. The justice system is not involved at all.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't commit a crime, why would you have to worry about the justice system? You wouldn't have any interaction with it.
Since the remedy in court for rights violations is only exclusion of evidence, the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments do not apply to the innocent.
Ask the innocent who were placed on the no-fly list how that works out.
Re: (Score:2)
You are either too stupid to live amongst humans or you are in fact, a very vile human. This is not a good look for you. Normally, I would wish you good luck, but either option says I would never want to be anywhere near you. Go to hell and stay there. Do not have a nice day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These private databases are going to become judge & jury to some sections of our society.
Which section of society is that? You mean the people who commit crimes?.
According to the story, commission of a a crime is irrelevant. Accusal of the crime is the trigger. And if you are one of those people who believes that accusal equals guilt, there is a whole subsection of society who are being shown innocent of crimes be modern DNA evidence.
But I suspect you might not care much about that.
Re: (Score:2)
These private databases are going to become judge & jury to some sections of our society.
Which section of society is that? You mean the people who commit crimes?.
According to the story, commission of a a crime is irrelevant. Accusal of the crime is the trigger. And if you are one of those people who believes that accusal equals guilt, there is a whole subsection of society who are being shown innocent of crimes be modern DNA evidence.
But I suspect you might not care much about that.
I have news for you, HR departments ARE judge and jury when it comes to hiring and firing, and employment laws exist to regulate that.
This is right from TFS:
"HireRight, a company that specializes in conducting background checks, will oversee the Industry Sharing Safety Program database. Other transportation and delivery companies in the US will have the chance to contribute and access the database as long as they adhere to the same data accuracy and privacy policies that Uber and Lyft must follow."
Company B
Re: Accused? (Score:4, Insightful)
Which section of society is that? You mean the people who commit crimes?
These are people who have been accused of a crime not proven to have committed or have been convicted of a crime. Are you saying people should be considered considered guilty until they prove their innocent?
Then perhaps the easiest solution is to not commit the crime in the first place.
These people have not been convicted of a crime, only accused of a crime. And, they haven't been accused of a crime by the police or investigated by the police, and no evidence has been provided show guilt. So, there is no evidence a crime was committed in the first place.
Re: Accused? (Score:3)
Well, there are two groups. Those who actually did commit crimes and those who were falsely accused. I think others have spoken up for the second group so will tackle the first.
People commit crimes. That's a reality irrelevant of the level of punishment or consequences. We have a system in place that we, as a society, more or less agree is a just system to measure and levy appropriate response upon our fellow members. And to-be criminals have a say in and agree to this system or social contract. The prim
Re: (Score:2)
The term was "accused"... You don't have to actually commit the crime, just be accused of doing so. Guilty until proven innocent.
A false accusation can easily ruin someone's life.
Re: (Score:2)
> You mean the people who commit crimes?
No, he means the people who are ACCUSED of committing crimes. Specifically the ones who are accused of committing crimes and did not actually commit those crimes. Normally we rely on judges and juries to figure this sort of thing out, but these databases shortcut that, creating a situation where whomever can etch your name into that database has IMMENSE power over you. You know how that fraternal order of police implies that you'll get a little cop-friendly stic
Re: Accused? (Score:2)
It already happens and sadly it's not illegal.
At a client of mine, they were upgrading their projectors. They had to get new and return old. So they outsourced it to a small temp staff company. One guy ran off with a $8k projector; more than 4 months wage.
Police case filed, and he was blacklisted at that small company, and our company. Now that guy can't get work at any client that uses that company for temp labor or background check. Nor can that guy find any employment with our client or at any vendor t
Re: (Score:2)
State dependent. Some states only require the consent of one individual in the sound or video recording.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
are you sure? bakers can not refuse to bake you a cake.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm aware of that case and it's a blatant intrusion into private business that never should have happened.
Honestly that case speaks more ill about stupid judges and our reliance on a discretionary appeal system that lets high courts sweep the mistakes of lower courts under the rug.
I looked at the case in question and both the state and federal supreme courts denied certiorari
Re: (Score:2)
I'm aware of that case and it's a blatant intrusion into private business that never should have happened.
Overturned, but now my FSM bakery can refuse service to Christians based on my religious freedomz:
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
> but now my FSM bakery can refuse service to Christians based on my religious freedomz
Actually it can't. As long as they don't ask you to make art that denigrates the FSM or any of his noodly appendages, you can't say no- the baker's case relied on him being unable to be forced to express a view he didn't agree with, not, as is often misreported, some right to not serve gay people, or Christians, etc.
Keep in mind this particular baker is flooded with political activists asking for cakes deliberately de
Re: (Score:2)
> but now my FSM bakery can refuse service to Christians based on my religious freedomz
Actually it can't. As long as they don't ask you to make art that denigrates the FSM or any of his noodly appendages, you can't say no- the baker's case relied on him being unable to be forced to express a view he didn't agree with, not, as is often misreported, some right to not serve gay people, or Christians, etc.
Keep in mind this particular baker is flooded with political activists asking for cakes deliberately designed to be offensive to someone with his beliefs- like if you want to make art, you have to have absolutely no limits on the art you make, or an endless parade of edgy fedora tippers will trek from all corners of the globe to try to make the government force you to express an opinion you don't believe, a full reversal of the first amendment.
Actually, if I find that it is offensive to me - I consider christians to be a blasphemy upon my religion. So I am well within my religious freedoms to not participate in blasphemy.
Although I hear some christians want to make themselves into a protected group.
Re: (Score:2)
The baker did not refuse service. He tefused speech. The gay couple could buy cakes from him , just not one made to celebrate a same sex wedding. As pointed out in the case he had many gay customers who bought cakes for birthdays , graduations, etc.
A difference without a distinction. I suppose his knowledge of who his customers wanted to have sex with came because they had to fill out a form or something saying who they preferred to boink?
Re: (Score:2)
The baker did not refuse service. He tefused speech. The gay couple could buy cakes from him , just not one made to celebrate a same sex wedding. As pointed out in the case he had many gay customers who bought cakes for birthdays , graduations, etc.
A difference without a distinction. I suppose his knowledge of who his customers wanted to have sex with came because they had to fill out a form or something saying who they preferred to boink?
I forgot to add - I fully support his right to be a bigot. I've also been around long enough to know that the people who are most concerned about gay people, tend to spend a lot of time thinking about gay sex. A whole lot of time. Much more time thinking about gay sex than gay people think about gay sex.
There's a very real reason for that.
Re: (Score:2)
are you sure? bakers can not refuse to bake you a cake.
You do know that that ruling was overturned. You can indeed refuse to make a dildo cake. You can indeed now refuse to make a cross shaped cake, or if you don't like the color of a person's hair. But it's more fun to be the poor pathetic conservative victim even after your story is wrong, and sometimes backfires on ya - funny how quickly y'all brave strong patriots that will stand your ground and won't put up with no shit turn into whiny victims, amirite?
Re: (Score:2)
You do know the same cake shop is being sued again by a tranny now.
https://www.nbcnews.com/featur... [nbcnews.com]
Do you have the supreme court ruling? The idiot has made himself what is called an attractive nuisance. Especially considering that he isn't actually obeying the commandments and statutes that his god has set out. They are quite clear.
Note that I do not agree with any of what I'm posting here from the christian book of note.
Leviticus has direct orders from his god
Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall s
Re: (Score:2)
Is being an "attractive nuisance" illegal? If so Slashdot should be shut down.
It depends. If you have a swimming pool in your neighborhood with no fencing around it - yeah, they'll probably enact a law and you'll have to fence it in.
For the owner of the cake shop, he'll be pestered by requests that he'll deny, and be sued again. Why? because he's being stupid, and not actually following his religion to begin with.
It's a cake, for crissakes. Most all of us love cake. Should gay people be denied cake? Should transvestites or transitioning people be denied cake?
It's his cake sh
Re: (Score:2)
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? Accept His Noodly Magnificence into your heart,
Yes, but...
I usually keep it in my stomach, not my heart.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? Accept His Noodly Magnificence into your heart,
Yes, but...
I usually keep it in my stomach, not my heart.
As long as you believe, your reward shall be fine hookers and good beer volcanos.
But he is a kind and loving meatball, even those who don't believe shall receive at least stale beer volcanos and used up hookers. I'll bet the beer is Pabst Blue Ribbon.
Re: (Score:2)
You have zero understanding of judaism or christianity.
I was raised by strict Catholic parents with even more strict Southern Baptist parents.
I know a whole lot more about religion and people than most people.
And what I know is not pretty - and the angry desert god is a cancer upon the earth.
How fortunate each and every one of us is to be born where the one true god holds sway.
Peace out! Reply if you like - but I avoid entanglements with people like you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter and Youtube can refuse your posts :)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, turns out it happened in two states with conflicting results.
Oregon: https://www.opb.org/news/artic... [opb.org]
Colorado: https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This is all predicated on the judgement of people to have a rational reason to make an action.
Without that, you'd have people randomly banned for no reason, which would impact business, which would lead to bad things (for the company).
This doesn't happen, largely because most people don't go looking to stir up trouble unless they need to.
I used to tend bar for many years (loved the job), and we always had the right to not serve anyone for any reason. In well over a decade of being in that role (eventually
Re: (Score:3)
This isnt "refusing service", this is creating a database linking people to criminal behavior based purely on hearsay and sharing that data with another company that a person does not work for.
There are multiple issues with it, but the obvoius one is libel. That's why many companies use The Work Number, which wont divulge details like that.
As others have pointed out, if convicted of the crime it will already show up in a background check. This is overstepping boundaries, and hopefully will be stopped.
Re: (Score:2)
Most states will let you access court records online, but it's pretty limited in what you get back in terms of details on the crime, but for violent crimes this shouldn't matter.
There's a bunch of problems with all of this to unpack.
In an ideal world, there should be an official law enforcement database you access for some level of criminal activity background checks, and it should be the ONLY database *anyone* is allowed to access for this information. Because a big problem is third parties who pack datab
Re: (Score:2)
But there's another problem which I think get less discussion, and it's that some low-level arrests don't ever get prosecuted and turned into convictions.
That is irrelevant as this is specifically for sexual assault.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, it cant hold the data to let you challenge it in the first place. They're using broad categories to avoid appearing to accuse people on the list of any specific incident, since they're relying on hearsay. That has the added benefit of making it impossible to challenge claims, as the details wont be in the data.
These companies were already given free passes to wreck worker's rights with the whole "contractors" thing. They'll just keep pushing until they hit a wall.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not wrong, and I don't especially like private industry running a blacklist to deny employment.
That being said, I think American has kind of long been plagued by failures in the criminal justice system to deliver criminal justice in an accountable and equitable way.
The inequity leads to weaker prosecutions and more people who are technically guilty of crimes out on the street as politicians and prosecutors pull back on prosecutions as a part of a civil rights agenda. This in turn leads to the public
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't there a court system in the US? And a way to conduct background checks through the police?
I wonder if there is a bad sentence in that writeup. There is a background check process, but to take a mere accusal as opposed to a plead of guilty or a conviction is going to place a lot of divorced men on Uber's ban list. A lot of men are accused of abuse with no evidence whatsoever.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't there a court system in the US? And a way to conduct background checks through the police?
Yes, there is. But, this isn't about courts. It is about companies. They are saying that people can call the ride share company instead of the police and say they were sexually assaulted, not have the claim investigated by the police, and have a driver banned from the industry. This is because, supposedly, many victims of sexual assault are afraid to go to the police.
Basically, this way, there doesn't have be evidence or an investigation and thus no police record at all because "believe victims" even if t
Re: (Score:2)
But that might make the Uber humanoid asset appear like an employee.And that is unacceptable. To Uber - and maybe Lyft ; I've still never seen either, and I'm not sure if Lyft operate in this country at all.
Re: (Score:2)
It pleases me to no end that this is the first comment I saw and that it was moderated to +5 insightful. Accusations are never enough to act on. If there is a pattern of accusations without proof, there should definitely be a deeper investigation than any single incident caused, but there is nothing actionable about mere accusations.
"accused of" ... "ensure [they] are banned" (Score:5, Insightful)
Does no-one see the problem there ?
Re:"accused of" ... "ensure [they] are banned" (Score:5, Insightful)
Easy way for a disgruntled ex (along with a group of his/her friends) to screw someone over.
Re:"accused of" ... "ensure [they] are banned" (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it so wrong to try to be sensible about things?
This is not sensible. This is literally treating someone accused, no in a court of law but to a third party, as guilty. Should you be fired from your job and banned from your industry is you are accused of something but never investigated and never proven guilty? Because, that is what this is.
Re: (Score:2)
Is safety on the line in any significant way? What percent of injuries in uber/lyfts are sustained from assault? What percent of those assaults will be stopped by this as opposed to background checks?
Then you take that number and hold it up to the number of people denied work regardless of judicial results.
If both sides include innocent people being caused suffering, how do you justify one over the other? How many rights lost to safety are too many?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's do nothing until all problems with something is ironed out.
Re: (Score:2)
*Accused* (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
"Uber customer service how may I help you?"
Cheapskate piece of shit: "Umm I was raped I want my money back."
People will do this for free rides to save a few bucks, and also out of sheer spite for someone. If someone makes an accusation you should trust them but by verify and tell them to file a police report. Loss of job or reputation to lies is why there are laws against slander and libel.
Re:*Accused* (Score:4, Informative)
People will do this for free rides to save a few bucks, and also out of sheer spite for someone.
Spite is the big one.
The problem is that saying "some people make accusations of rape for revenge" gets the whole "Oh, you defend rapists now?" routine down on your head.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that saying "some people make accusations of rape for revenge"
The problem is saying that with the implication that it is somehow almost as common as legitimate rape accusations, not to mention unreported rape.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that saying "some people make accusations of rape for revenge"
The problem is saying that with the implication that it is somehow almost as common as legitimate rape accusations, not to mention unreported rape.
So "some" doesn't mean anything, then? It's just skipped over?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some doesn't mean anything when the person bringing it up is obviously implying it to be a much bigger "risk" than it is.
So you say it never happens, then? You think rape trials are a waste of time because no one ever lies about it? That seems to be what you're implying.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a big claim. Where's your evidence? Or are you just making up that they're implying something because you have a subjective opinion that they are, therefore it must be fact?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it really isn't. Except for people who want to try and attack something by trying to redefine words like "Some". Studies have shown a fairly hefty chunk of reports as verifiably false. This doesn't include the "not enough evidence to convict".
Some means "some", as in "a portion of". Or "There exist cases of", so that people can go an look up stats themselves and delve into it if they want stats, but can just be focused on the concept that "An accusation does not mean guilt, because there are bad act
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is saying that with the implication that it is somehow almost as common as legitimate rape accusations, not to mention unreported rape.
It doesn't work this way. The personal risk of false accusation faced by drivers is far greater than the general risk faced by average members of the population. Drivers as individuals are constantly alone with other randos far greater than are average members of society as invidiuals. I would guess a non-hobby driver could make between a thousand and two thousand trips a year and that false to true rape/sex assault accusation ratio is between 1:10 and 1:20.
Or to put it another way the biggest sellers on
Re: (Score:2)
the implication that it is somehow almost as common as legitimate rape accusations
There's a case that can be made that false accusations greatly outnumber real ones.
Certainly of the ones reported to the police - which should have a higher bar than reporting to Uber - only a miniscule percentage result in a charge, let alone a conviction.
Of the rest, some will be a perpetrator that can't be found, insufficient evidence to prosecute, the wrong man arrested or another reason a victim can not receive justice.
Many however will be a woman trying to avoid being caught in an affair, acting from
Guilt by accusation (Score:2)
Why not go the whole hog and bring back the ducking stool?
If a driver is accused by a passenger of assault then the company should be reporting it to the police to deal with.
Re: (Score:2)
From a practical PoV, what if the crime doesn't reach the level of being prosecuted?
Say for example, there is a tip jar and a passenger steals $5 from it. You'd likely struggle to get a police department to pursue the case even if you had dashcam footage. Petty theft, disruptive passengers, and other minor offenses are often either not a priority or not actually a crime. You still want to remove the assholes from your service.
Re: (Score:2)
There the "star" evaluation system - if a driver (or passenger) receives too many one-star reviews, get it off the platform (i.e. don't renew its contract when it expires, or allow the drivers to see the bad rating and not offer their service).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but certain things do deserve more than just a low rating penalty by one of N different companies that do identical behavior. Like this was motivated by an influencer who spat and assaulted a driver who was kicked off and then said 'fine, I'll join your competitors'. It's regional news so the case is likely going to face actual scrutiny, but if it wasn't being recorded, chances are nothing would have happened. Infact, that same person has done it before so enforcement is too lax.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's a crime, report it.
If it's not a crime, it's not sexual assault.
Blackballing is dangerous (Score:2)
Industry wide blackballing of workers has landed other sectors in a lot of legal difficulty in the past. If someone ends up on this list as a result of a false accusation, then this could prove very expensive for every company that then declines to employe them.
A lot of you seem upset about this (Score:1, Insightful)
As you scream into the void about the possibility of this being abused, I'd like you all to remember how angry you were about how expensive taxis are because of all the government regulations.
This is what deregulation and letting corporations have all the power gets you; no rights and your entire life being subject to the whims of corporations and their PR departments' brilliant ideas.
mod parent up (Score:2)
Furthermore, these 2 ride sharing corps are losing money despite skimming a great deal off the top for services that are nearly all automated (software.) Plus they push tipping to avoid even more costs.
China may have a government rating system but we'll soon have many private ones that will have to do extremely bad things before it even gets the public's outrage high enough for a few regulations (likely with loopholes if the PR and lobbyists handle it well.)
as nobel as i think this is. i thk its a bad idea (Score:2)
the idea of having a list of persons that are blackballed throught out multiple companies based on a list.
i can see how this list is 100% going to be used to regulate drivers that even thought they do not meet the criteria. get added because they
are troublesome for one reason or another.
i believe some one else said there is a reason we have a judicial system and police checks that should be used for things like this. if you can not find it with a police check its prob going to be a law suit waiting to happe
Re:as nobel as i think this is. i thk its a bad id (Score:4, Insightful)
"Instigation to unionization"
"Not offering to service calls to lower reviewed customers"
"Too many sick/off days taken in the last month/year/..."
If caught, they will blame it for an error in their system, a mismatched name or something else....
What will they do (Score:2)
...in the other 194 countries where such sharing of data is a crime?
The woke hate police reports (Score:5, Insightful)
That's why you have college rape tribunals, databases like this, etc. They hate having to admit that the police are a very necessary evil.
People lie all the time about stuff like this. It's also absolute bullshit that "victims are never believed." I was falsely accused by a girl in HS over 20 years ago. She recanted and apologized for it, but people who knew me did a 180 so fast it would make your head spin and this was deep in "redneck country."
So don't give me that bullshit that we live in some Islamic hellhole where it takes the testimony of four women to outweigh a man's. If anything, it requires absolute evidence that nothing could have happened to get the system to not act.
ZERO TOLERANCE GENERATION (Score:3)
Police have nothing to do with it. Raised by zero tolerance to have zero tolerance. Think about it, no excuses were allowed no matter how reasonable; these kids saw punishment with zero brained righteousness. They grew up into a whole generation reflecting their boomer's idiotic policies of avoiding the complexities of reality... so powerful they couldn't even be called the "Me generation" so boomer it was.
These are kids taking up the position of an authoritarian police state; no need for actual police i
who knew (Score:2)
I see rich lawyers in the future (Score:3)
Uber and Lyft will work together to share information on US drivers and delivery people accused of physical and sexual assault to ensure those individuals are banned on both platforms, the two companies announced on Thursday in separate blog posts. Engadget reports:
What we have here is two corporations that are going to be making statements to each other about independent contractors which accuse them of a crime which has never been investigated which will then prevent said independent contractors from working in the industry. This sounds like a clear case of slander and liable. And, the fun part is, it won't be a class action suit. It will be individual suits of slander and liable against each company involved. And, maybe, after there have been enough of those, there will be a class action suit for conspiracy to restrain trade.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it'll count as defamation in the US. The database will record 'an accusation was made'.
The decision not to hire is based on the accusation, not on the veracity of that, or on whether the driver has ever assaulted someone.
In the UK the stronger defamation laws may provide protection against this, but in the US? Unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the driver can find the source of the accusation, they can certainly look to litigate against them.
The statement by the companies is however not an accusation of sexual assault. It is that an accusation of sexual assault was made.
That is factually true, entirely irrespective of the validity of the accusation.
Uber blacklist (Score:2)
Two weeks ago I requested an Uber. The driver assigned to me was 35 minutes away, with traffic. I got a message from him saying that he was "too far" and that I should cancel the trip. I was deciding whether I wanted to do so (I needed to get to the airport) and apparently I took too long, so he canceled the trip himself and gave the reason "Rider was not wearing a mask". I called "diamond" customer support and they said, "Don't worry, the system already figured out that was not possible so you won't be
Probably well-intentioned, but ultimately doomed (Score:2)
One could argue that this is necessary to cover a gap in the current process between accusation and trial: to wit, if someone driving for Gig Driving Platform A is accused of assault, and they're able to remain free (e.g. by posting bail), and they are guilty; there is currently nothing stopping them from switching to Gig Driving Platform B and repeating their offence (or worse).
Of course, that falls into the pit of failure that the standard "guilty until proven innocent" arguments do. Unless the crime is p
As long as there is video evidence (Score:2)
The accused need to be able to view the actual evidence to appeal. There's a reason we have due process.
However, it does make sense to a degree that Uber and Lyft act on petty offenses before they have cases that end up in court. If you have video evidence of a driver smacking a passenger or touching them inappropriately, then the driver should be off the road ASAP whether the victim presses charges or not. You should probably never have a Lyft or Uber take you directly home if you're concerned so they n
You can’t do that (Score:3)
Blacklist’s are the bane of McCarthism, Hollywood’s kneejerk program to punish writer’s it simply chose to ostracize. NO no!
Hell NO! I’ve ridden along Uber. I witnessed first hand driver’s being abused, well propositioned, by females in the car. Its a thing and women who are feminists will standup and acknowledge. Its their right.
Convicted sex offenders I agree should not be trusted in service to the public!
Re: (Score:2)
I see massive lawsuits pending if someone needed a ride, was unduly on this list, and hark came to them.
There will be no lawsuit because the companies are not required to provide a ride to anyone nor are they required to provide a ride within any specific time frame.
My 89 year old mother has had Uber drivers accept a fare and then never show up. I hope thereâ(TM)s a way to ban them across driving platforms also!
If she files a complaint each time it happens, it goes on the driver's record and the driver record and effects the rides offered to the driver. If there are enough complaints, then the driver will be dropped from the application.