Uber And Lyft Fingerprint Pros And Cons

In 2016, the City Council of Austin passed a mandatory ordinance that required all Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) to use the fingerprint background check in their hiring process. Immediately after the ordinance was passed, Uber and Lyft opposed the fingerprint background check and responded by leaving the city of Austin. Several citizens were indifferent towards how Uber and Lyft responded and some were even relieved when the Governor of Texas signed Bill 100, which allowed Uber and Lyft to return and operate in Austin without the use of the fingerprint background check. I believe that in order to demonstrate to Uber and Lyft, and other TNCs that want to follow in their footsteps, we should boycott the services offered by Uber and

Uber makes several claims as to why they oppose fingerprinting their drivers, stating “that fingerprint is unfair, onerous, racially tilted and unreliable” (Board, para. 4) Firstly, the arguments made are largely unfounded because of the fact that Uber does in fact submit to the fingerprint requirement in New York City and Houston. In other words, if the city shows profit potential then these TNC’s are willing to “suck it up” and “bear the burden” (Board, para. 4). Another argument that Uber and Lyft make is their fear that fingerprinting is a hassle that will discourage several new potential drivers, but in fact “about half-million have already signed up across the country”, which is no small number at all (Board, para. 5). In an article published on The Washington Post, it states that “on average prospective ridesharing drivers only pay about $40 to be fingerprinted, a process that only takes about 10 minutes” (Board, para 5). Additionally, those small ten minutes that it takes to be fingerprinted could save someone from getting sexually assaulted or hurt in general. However, one of the largest reasons that Uber and Lyft disagree with the fingerprint background check is because it slightly strengthens that argument that Uber and

As a student, myself I have also found myself using TNCs’ like Uber, however when the news about female customers being sexually assaulted by their drivers appeared on the news, I immediately uninstalled their app and decided to use the services of other ride-sharing companies that did in fact use the fingerprint background check when hiring their drivers. But passengers aren’t the only ones affected by this controversy, drivers are as well. When Uber left in the spring 2016, immediately there were several alternatives that were created that indeed incorporated the fingerprint background check in their hiring process and that provided the same type of income that was being provided by Uber and Lyft. These alternative options give passengers the freedom to choose, as well as drivers the ability to have a variety of ride-sharing companies for whom to work. By using these alternatives, we can help boost the numbers of these startup companies and decrease the number of clients for Uber and Lyft. Also, the lack of concern that Uber and Lyft had for the thousands of drivers they abandoned should serve to make drivers realize that Uber and Lyft only care about the money a city can produce in their favor. In an article published on The Guardian, an anonymous Austin driver was interviewed about Uber and Lyft leaving and