They’re opposing the bills because the things they suggest won’t do anything their existing safety procedures don’t do, and reading the companies security/safety protocols and the proposed new ones it’s pretty clear that they are not needed.
In her lawsuit filed against Lyft in January, Willford alleges she was “subjected to unwelcome, nonconsensual sexual contact, touching” and lewd comments during the ride.
Willford was picked up by a different driver than the person identified in the Lyft app, according to the suit.
How would these new bills have prevented this? How would they prevent a Lyft driver from letting someone else drive their car to pick up passengers? How would they prevent lewd comments during the ride? Riders can already record their entire trip on their phone if they want. These companies already do background checks. They already suspend drivers if complaints are made and deemed serious/real. They already ban drivers who assault people or who let other people drive for them.
What exactly do they think these new bills would solve and how?
I don’t know if these bills would help, but there is a need for something to be done. The daughter of a friend of mine was raped by a Lyft driver a few years ago. Going home from a party, she didn’t want to drive because she had been drinking. She thought Lyft was the safer option. It wasn’t.
The bill would jeopardize rideshare services in Colorado “to an untenable degree, and could very well lead to companies that Coloradans rely on exiting the market, raising prices, or reducing the number of drivers,"
What a bizarre statement. If they exit the market, everything will improve.
like petroleum companies opposing bills that aim to encourage batteries during rides.
