Uber routinely approves drivers with violent felony convictions if those convictions are over seven years old. This includes drivers with a history of assault, child abuse, and stalking. The ride-hailing giant maintains that this policy balances safety with the opportunity for convicted individuals to rebuild their lives, but critics argue that it compromises passenger security.
Systemic Weaknesses in Background Checks
Uber’s background checks exclude convictions older than seven years and only scan for crimes committed in the driver’s place of residence. This allows violent felons with records from other states to slip through the net undetected. The company has a stricter ban on drivers convicted of murder, kidnapping, sexual assault, or terrorism, yet still approves drivers with violent histories.
Frequency of Sexual Abuse Reports
Uber acknowledges that it receives reports of serious sexual abuse or misconduct every 32 minutes. This admission follows a prior New York Times investigation revealing that such reports occurred every eight minutes between 2017 and 2022. The company dismisses 75 percent of reports as minor (such as explicit language or unwanted advances), but this does not negate the fact that serious incidents are frequent.
State-Level Discrepancies
A U.S. Department of Justice study found that approximately one-third of individuals arrested on rape charges have at least one prior felony conviction. Despite California laws prohibiting violent felons from working for ride-hailing apps, cases of Uber drivers convicted of rape with prior violent felonies have surfaced in the state.
Regulatory Failures
In Massachusetts, a 2017 audit revealed that 8,000 Uber drivers approved by the company would have been banned by state regulators. This suggests that roughly 1 in 10 Uber passengers are driven by individuals who would not pass stricter background checks. Lyft, in contrast, does not approve any drivers with violent convictions, regardless of the time elapsed.
Cost-Cutting Measures
Uber executives have acknowledged internal concerns about safety shortcomings. In 2018, one executive admitted, “We are def not doing everything we can,” and further noted that proposed safety measures such as fingerprint checks were rejected due to cost and onboarding speed considerations. The company’s willingness to prioritize growth over safety has been a long-standing issue.
Uber’s approval of violent felons highlights a systemic failure in background checks, regulatory oversight, and corporate prioritization of growth over passenger safety. The policy raises questions about the company’s true commitment to protecting riders and whether its current practices are sufficient to mitigate the risks posed by drivers with violent histories.
