4 ms·
If the only convictions someone had were the possession and forgery charges, I wouldn't mind. The domestic abuse case, I'm not sure.
by dajohnson89 10y ago
If the only convictions someone had were the possession and forgery charges, I wouldn't mind. The domestic abuse case, I'm not sure.
- throwanem 10y agoYou wouldn't mind placing your life in the hands of someone with a documented history of both predilection for consciousness-altering substances, and poor future time orientation and impulse control? ...well, you're braver than I am, that's for sure.
- ghurtado 10y agoThe larger point is that it shouldn't be up to the individual consumer to decide which employee criminal records are acceptable and which ones are not. Brands exist for this very reason: so the consumer can choose to trust / not trust the brand at large based on their past experiences with the brand, which are of course influenced by hiring practices, among other things. It is a trust by proxy if you will, and it is the more critical for unsupervised "employees". If Uber wants to build a trustworthy brand, it is up to Uber to 1. Define their hiring standards and practices loudly, transparently and clearly (like every other large company does) and 2. Enforce them consistently As it stands right now, (and you may feel differently) I am not the kind of consumer that would do business with a company that leaves it up to the consumer to figure out whether their employees are violent criminals or not.