Obviously you do not want to employ people with those kinds of backgrounds in a setting where they could repeat past behaviour, but there is an overwhelming number of felons without violent or sexual records and by denying them employment, you are participating in a system designed to coerce poor, uneducated and misguided individuals into repetitive criminal behavior.
If you already understand this distinction between non-violent and violent federal offenders, please consider reflecting it with your choice of words as to not cause further harm to others caught in this system.
Don't see it in the source article.
The last hyperlink has it and this is them paying the fine
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Uber-settles-lawsuit-...
What's odd to me is those 25 apparently were only found because they had been cited by the police. So the 99.9% that weren't cited by the police could have tens of thousands more at least how I understand it
Just read some other links in article and they were also sued for having at least 25 riders be former sex offenders, sexual assault, and murderers just in Cali wtf. I seriously want to see how many sexual assaults have occurred in uber vs taxis. I see one every day from Uber just in Cali. If taxis did that they would lose their 250k-million dollar medallion so that's an incentive I guess to an archaic regulation. I know others disagree with me, but I would not hire any felons to be drivers. You're giving them complete power over any passenger with no witnesses. I'm completely okay with felons working anywhere with people, but I wouldn't hire one to babysit my kid. That's the similar level of power they have in a car at night and honestly most rape assaults I've seen, the perpetrators had priors