Uber Tightens Driver Background Checks as Sexual Assault Lawsuits Continue

Uber is expanding its U.S. driver background check standards as the company continues to face thousands of lawsuits from passengers who allege they were sexually assaulted or harassed by drivers.

The new policy, first reported by Bloomberg, applies not only to new drivers and couriers, but also retroactively to existing workers on the Uber platform.

Beginning today, Uber will broaden the list of criminal convictions that can disqualify a driver or courier from using the app. The company said the changes are expected to remove tens of thousands of existing workers from the platform, representing about 0.5% of Uber’s active U.S. workforce.

The timing is significant. Uber is under growing legal pressure from passengers who allege the company failed to do enough to prevent sexual misconduct during rides.

Uber Expands Disqualifying Criminal Convictions

Under Uber’s updated policy, certain older criminal convictions may now disqualify drivers even if the offense occurred more than seven years ago.

The newly disqualifying convictions include violent felonies such as armed robbery and aggravated assault, as well as child abuse, child endangerment, strangulation and stalking.

Previously, Uber’s screening system may not have barred drivers with some of these convictions if the record was more than seven years old. Uber already prohibited drivers with lifetime convictions for offenses such as sexual assault, sex crimes involving minors, murder, homicide, kidnapping and terrorism.

The company said the expanded standards are designed to reduce the chance that relevant criminal records are missed during initial screenings and annual reviews.

Uber is also expanding the scope of its background checks by using a longer Social Security number trace. The company said this may help identify additional jurisdictions where an applicant or driver has lived, allowing background check vendors to search more court records.

Some Longtime Drivers Will Be Exempted

Uber said it will exempt roughly 2,000 longtime drivers from the new disqualification standards.

According to the company, those drivers may continue using the platform if their felony conviction is more than 15 years old, was not sexual in nature and they have no serious interpersonal safety-related complaints.

Uber said it made that decision after consulting with civil rights and safety advocates, some of whom raised concerns about automatically removing long-tenured drivers who had participated safely on the platform for many years.

New Policy Comes Amid Uber Sexual Assault Litigation

The updated background check policy comes as Uber faces thousands of sexual assault and misconduct lawsuits across the United States.

Many of the lawsuits allege that Uber failed to take reasonable steps to protect passengers, including by not doing enough to screen drivers, monitor high-risk rides or respond to known safety concerns.

In February 2026, a federal jury awarded $8.5 million in compensatory damages in a bellwether case involving passenger sexual assault allegations. Bellwether cases are early test trials that may help both sides evaluate the strength of claims and defenses in a larger group of lawsuits.

Uber has denied that it is legally responsible for criminal misconduct by drivers, arguing in many cases that drivers are independent contractors and that the company provides a technology platform rather than a transportation service. Plaintiffs have challenged that position, arguing that Uber exercises significant control over the ride experience and should be held accountable when passenger safety systems fail.

The litigation remains ongoing.

California Deal Also Pressured Uber to Strengthen Safety Measures

Uber’s national background check changes also overlap with recent developments in California.

The company had been facing a proposed ballot measure that would have expanded rideshare companies’ liability for sexual misconduct involving riders and drivers. The proposed measure also sought additional safety-related requirements, including more frequent reporting and stronger driver screening obligations.

Uber and California attorneys later reached a compromise intended to avoid a costly ballot fight. As part of the broader agreement, Uber agreed to strengthen certain safety measures.

For survivors and advocates, the broader issue is not only whether Uber changes its policies now, but whether stronger safeguards should have been in place earlier.

Uber and Lyft Also Face Scrutiny Over Pricing Practices

Uber and Lyft are also facing renewed scrutiny over how their apps calculate fares.

A Consumer Reports investigation found that riders checking the same routes at roughly the same time were sometimes shown significantly different prices. The group tested 30 routes across 17 states and found that all routes produced at least two different price clusters.

According to Consumer Reports, per a report by The Los Angeles Times, the median difference between the lowest and highest price clusters was about 50%. In some cases, the gap was far larger.

The report raised questions about algorithmic pricing and whether rideshare companies are being transparent enough with passengers about how fares are calculated.

Uber and Lyft strongly disputed the findings. Uber said the investigation was flawed because ride prices can vary based on real-time factors such as rider demand, driver availability, traffic, routing and the distance a driver must travel to pick up a passenger. Lyft also said the testing methods may have created artificial demand by having multiple volunteers check prices at the same time.

Both companies denied using surveillance pricing or personalizing fares based on individual customer profiles.

Still, the Consumer Reports findings add to a larger public debate about how much control rideshare companies have over the customer experience — and how much transparency riders deserve.

A Broader Accountability Question for Rideshare Companies

The background check changes and pricing investigation involve different issues. One concerns rider safety. The other concerns fare transparency.

But both point to the same larger question: how much should passengers be expected to trust systems they cannot see?

When someone opens a rideshare app, they are relying on the company’s screening process, safety policies, driver monitoring systems, pricing algorithms and response procedures. Much of that happens behind the scenes.

For survivors who have come forward in Uber sexual assault lawsuits, the concern is that these systems may not have done enough to protect them.

Uber’s expanded background check standards may remove some drivers with serious criminal histories from the platform. But the lawsuits against the company focus on a much broader question: whether Uber’s safety systems were adequate before passengers were harmed.

As the litigation continues, courts, regulators and the public may continue asking whether rideshare companies should be held to higher standards when their platforms place passengers in vehicles with strangers.