Washington - Maryland Public Service Commission, spokeswoman Tori Leonard, said 6 percent of the app-based drivers have been booted since the state began processing ride-hailing applications at the end of 2015. The vast majority nearly 97 percent were driving for Uber, and there are 74 000 drivers registered.
The commission, which regulates ride-hailing in Maryland, booted more than 4 000 of the state's ride-hail drivers off the roads, because they failed to meet the
state's screening requirements, despite passing Uber and Lyft's background
checks.
Leonard said, drivers can be rejected for a multitude of
reasons, including criminal and driving history issues, failure to verify
identity, too little driving experience, and being on a limited-term temporary
license.
The state doesn't conduct its own background checks, but rather,
processes applications, reviewing information provided in Uber and Lyft's
reports for compliance. Leonard said a "good portion" of the
rejections dating back to 2015 were not for criminal or driving-history related
reasons, meaning they "would not present a safety issue," but it was
unclear if that pool made up a majority.
Uber said the PSC's criteria for determining compliance
often relied on subjective factors, rather than objective criteria. But it
lauded Maryland for adopting new rules for vetting drivers earlier this year.
"This
is a debate about fairness. Maryland is a leader on criminal justice reform,
but that progress has lagged in its application to the vehicle for hire
industry, unfairly limiting access to work for many citizens," Uber
spokesman, Bill Gibbons said. "Fortunately, the Maryland Public Service
Commission has recognised the need to think more carefully about who deserves
second chances.
We applaud the Commission for initiating a new rulemaking
aimed at developing a process that is transparent, objective, and fair to those
seeking opportunities for work. "A breakdown of the rejections was not
immediately available.
The Boston Globe first reported the Maryland figure in a
story that weighed Massachusetts' ride-hailing background checks against other
states' screening methods. Uber derided Maryland screening requirements as too
vague in an August letter to the commission.
The "Commission's regulations do not contain specific
criteria to determine whether an individual's criminal history should preclude
them from operating as a driver in Maryland," read the letter from an Uber
attorney.
"Instead, the Division utilizes non-public guidelines for this
review. "Maryland later adopted an alternative screening process with more
specific requirements, which would allow Uber and Lyft keep operating in the
state without conducting fingerprint-based background checks preferred by some
law enforcement officials. Uber, had threatened to leave Maryland if fingerprint
screening was mandated.
Instead, Maryland regulators said the ride-hailing companies
should subject drivers to screenings that encompass their entire adult life, rather
than simply going back seven years and address concerns about identity
verification, the comprehensiveness of record searches, and timely follow-up
requirements.
The revelation that thousands had been disqualified from driving,
despite meeting Uber and Lyft's initial requirements, was fodder for those who
say ride-hailing companies are too lax in their screening.
Massachusetts, has banned more than 8 200 of nearly 71 000
drivers who had already passed ride-hailing companies' background checks,
according to the Globe. Among them were 51 registered sex offenders and
hundreds of others who were barred for sex-related crimes and violent
incidents, the Globe reported.
It was unclear what proportions of drivers booted in
Maryland were disqualified for safety reasons. Lyft said its drivers were most
often disqualified for licenses marked "not acceptable for federal
purposes" a type of license issued to immigrants living in the country
illegally and insufficient documentation, meaning drivers might have failed to
supply the exact information regulators were seeking. Still, the removal of
thousands of drivers renewed concerns over the efficacy of Uber and Lyft's
vetting.
Dave Sutton, a spokesman for 'Who's Driving You?', an
initiative of the Taxicab, Limousine & Paratransit Association, said the results
prove government and FBI approved checks are superior to Uber and Lyft's
screenings, despite the companies' claims to be as or more effective.
"It's
completely unacceptable," Sutton said. "I mean, government checks are
clearly superior to private checks. Uber has been notoriously sloppy in so many
aspects of its business. It's not surprising the fault was found more
there."
The Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles did not respond
Monday to an inquiry on whether similar issues were found under its
ride-hailing law, which went into effect in mid 2015. Uber, referred back to
its testimony in front of the Public Service Commission last year.
At that hearing,
witness, Glenn Ivey, pointed out that when drivers appealed their
disqualification on background-check-related grounds, PSC officers had
overturned the rejections 76 percent of the time.
WASHINGTON POST