Uber to Resume in Calgary December 6 2016

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Delgar

So he can intentionally not find out the details as Mayor so as to excuse himself? You are still missing more but I'll leave that up to you, I'm not here to restore sight to those who can't see.

That's just killing the conversation here. I don't care enough to dig into this and try to guess what you think is important. You can either state your opinion or we can just move along. Makes no difference to me.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Slava

That's just killing the conversation here. I don't care enough to dig into this and try to guess what you think is important. You can either state your opinion or we can just move along. Makes no difference to me.

Roger. You gave up instead of reading.

EDIT: OK Slava, you thanked this post. I'm not going to dig anymore. For those who care about reading the topic, pay attention to what happened and make your own decision, keeping in mind that a message board debate doesn't get to the truth in most cases.

[zamler]

So Nenshi being Nenshi is a valid excuse now I see.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Did you even bother to do any research before spouting off as you accused Nenshi of doing?

Lyft does do criminal checks and their drivers do have insurance. Some people just look for anything to bash Nenshi with.

Good grief.

Both companies provide their own checks and insurance, neither passing muster for our rules, and neither requires additional licences. Just like uber, Lyft has said the Calgary regs won't allow them to operate here. Nenshi has earned whatever grief he gets over this.

That said I actually think this whole thing is little more than a chuckle. I'm sure uber has been called worse by better, and plenty have had choice things to say about our mayor.

[GGG]

I don't see a problem in hiring former criminals to test the efficacy of a background check system.

The city wants to know if the lower cost background check is effective. If it is they can get rid of this requirement and compromise with uber. If it fails to catch the convicts then the cities in instance on a proper background check makes sense.

To me this was good policy creation and gathering and using data rather than rhetoric to make a decision on what kind of background check should be required.

Not a fan of the uber ceo comments as the Mayor shouldn't be making those types of comments outside his closed circle of friends and employees.

[dino7c]

So are you guys saying the Uber driver that picked me up in the van that has "Free Candy" painted on the side might be some kinda perv?

ya used me Nenshi, ya used me!

[getbak]

Originally Posted by dino7c

So are you guys saying the Uber driver that picked me up in the van that has "Free Candy" painted on the side might be some kinda perv?

Did he give you the candy?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by getbak

Did he give you the candy?

no but I am meeting later in the alley to pick up my puppy

[llwhiteoutll]

So apparently Nenshi isn't actually aware of anyone convicted of a sexual offense or violent crime who passed an Uber background check. This despite the fact he claimed the city themselves hired these people in an effort to test Uber's background checks.

He really needs to self moderate, it's only a matter of time before he's hauled to court again and we wind up with more legal bills.

[pgsieve]

I think this is all just another example of how his ego is getting way to big. Policy decisions aside, he's lost my vote for good based on how self-absorbed and how condescending he is to anyone who disagrees with him

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by pgsieve

I think this is all just another example of how his ego is getting way to big. Policy decisions aside, he's lost my vote for good based on how self-absorbed and how condescending he is to anyone who disagrees with him

From my experience, it's actually a matter of him seeming self-absorbed and condescending to people who disagree with him, not the other way around.

Mouths water at the chance to call him both those things, even when it's not relevant to the situation. I'd rather have a straight shooter with a personality than a stuck up loser who is out of touch.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

A decent job for a criminal rejoining society is to be alone in a vehicle with a person who has no idea about the criminal's past? Never mind the sex offenders part, what about robbing a passenger, pulling a weapon on them and making them withdraw funds from an ATM?

There may be some people who are fine with criminals driving them around, but I would bet that the vast majority of people are not.

You would have to be the dumbest person in the world to think that's a good plan. You would be caught instantly as they know who you are and your exact location the whole time. You would have better success mugging people walking downtown, at least then you are anonymous and don't have a gps tracker on you.

If a cab service started up and hired ex cons, people trying to re-enter society, and made it cheaper than a cab I would take it every time.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Swarly

You would have to be the dumbest person in the world to think that's a good plan. You would be caught instantly as they know who you are and your exact location the whole time. You would have better success mugging people walking downtown, at least then you are anonymous and don't have a gps tracker on you.

If a cab service started up and hired ex cons, people trying to re-enter society, and made it cheaper than a cab I would take it every time.

Do you think a criminal will mug someone in the car? Or maybe text one of his buddies and tell him the coast is clear and that he just dropped off Steve at the airport.

That's just one example of literally thousands I can come up with.

If a sex offender picks up a pretty young lady do you think he will assault her during the ride to downtown or maybe ask a few questions and find out if she lives alone and then sexually assault her later?

It's easier for you to say that you'd take a cab driven by an ex-con because most likely you're a middle aged male who would be pretty safe from a sexual assault. Try bring a 19 year old woman who lives alone and needs a ride at 2am and tell me how safe you feel getting a ride by an ex con who just got out of jail for rape.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't see a problem in hiring former criminals to test the efficacy of a background check system.

The city wants to know if the lower cost background check is effective. If it is they can get rid of this requirement and compromise with uber. If it fails to catch the convicts then the cities in instance on a proper background check makes sense.

To me this was good policy creation and gathering and using data rather than rhetoric to make a decision on what kind of background check should be required.

Not a fan of the uber ceo comments as the Mayor shouldn't be making those types of comments outside his closed circle of friends and employees.

Then he has to come clean, did he use city funds to hire criminals to do this, and what kind of criminals?

And if he used the police data base to mine people and use them without the consent of these criminals to have other people fill in the apps, then it's equivalent to identity threat at worst, and a mis use of the police database at best.

He has to come clean, he can't say I don't know and then have the city clamp up on this to protect him.

Maybe he had good intentions, but the methods have to be looked at here.

If some criminal somewhere found out that his name and record was used to apply for these uber positions without his or her permission, I would expect that they could sue the city for use of their identity without their permission.

Also you could almost think that the city was participating in fraud.

Nenshi outright has to come clean as do the city managers and personal that were involved in this program.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by Swarly

You would have to be the dumbest person in the world to think that's a good plan. You would be caught instantly as they know who you are and your exact location the whole time. You would have better success mugging people walking downtown, at least then you are anonymous and don't have a gps tracker on you.

If a cab service started up and hired ex cons, people trying to re-enter society, and made it cheaper than a cab I would take it every time.

Most convicted criminals aren't known for their intelligence.

I don't think they're going to sign up as Uber drivers because they see it as a good way to hunt for victims, necessarily. But the guy who is a former criminal, working for Uber and not making much, and some life stressor comes along and he makes a bad decision. I don't want to be the potential victim in his car when that arises.

If a company wants to start up a cab service with ex-cons, then they need to clearly state that is what they are, so you can take it and the rest of us who are not comfortable can stay far, far away!

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Then he has to come clean, did he use city funds to hire criminals to do this, and what kind of criminals?

And if he used the police data base to mine people and use them without the consent of these criminals to have other people fill in the apps, then it's equivalent to identity threat at worst, and a mis use of the police database at best.

He has to come clean, he can't say I don't know and then have the city clamp up on this to protect him.

Maybe he had good intentions, but the methods have to be looked at here.

If some criminal somewhere found out that his name and record was used to apply for these uber positions without his or her permission, I would expect that they could sue the city for use of their identity without their permission.

Also you could almost think that the city was participating in fraud.

Nenshi outright has to come clean as do the city managers and personal that were involved in this program.

I've seen a lot of this in the thread...are you people suggesting ex-cons should not be able to take a job, or work? I don't get it...I' rather them be paid for a legitimate job(or in this case, probably a one-off) than rely on social services or worse to get money. I'm not sure what is so bad about the city paying someone with a criminal record(that has served their time) to do a one-off contract. Isn't the point of our justice system that you serve your time and you are free to re-enter society? This sounds like a steaming mound of faux-outrage here.

[CaptainCrunch]

If they are hired because they are strictly violent or sexual offenders then I have a big problem with it.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If they are hired because they are strictly violent or sexual offenders then I have a big problem with it.

Why?

[CaptainCrunch]

You're not reforming them or giving them a chance at a new life, you're strictly hiring them and rewarding them for past behavior.

This is equivalent to hing thugs to work for the city to me.

"Gentlemen lets find the worst scum out there and give them public money"

There is going to have to be an inquiry into this thing and "I don't know the methods" is not going to pass muster. In this case because he was basically bragging about it, the buck stops right at the mayors desk.

If they used these peoples information without permission, that's a big problem on a couple of levels as I stated before, and its a problem not only for the mayor but the police department because they basically and in the simplest form by using them to apply for jobs without their knowledge committed fraud.

If they hired criminals because they are violent criminals or sex offenders that's a big problem.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If they hired criminals because they are violent criminals or sex offenders that's a big problem.

So how else do you test if someone with a violent crime/sex offender conviction can get through Uber's screening?

I agree if they were using police records to find them, that's a huge issue, but if no FOIP policies were violated I really don't see the big deal here.