Ride-hailing Service just for Women – Legal or Not?

“I’ll call an Uber,” has become a household phrase. Ride-hailing service giants including Uber and Lyft have spearheaded a multi-billion-dollar industry – shaking up taxi services across the world.

Taxi drivers aren’t the only ones concerned about the rise of Uber and Lyft. Women have also expressed unease about these services due to the belief that there are inadequate safety measures in place for women during transit. Multiple complaints and lawsuits have been filed against Uber drivers over allegations of assault, rape and more.

This overwhelming wave of concern has led to entrepreneurs developing a ride-hailing service solely for women.

… But is it legal?

Some experts are waving the “discrimination” flag, commenting that if the ride-hailing services were to replace “for women only” with a race, i.e., “for white people only,” it would unquestionably be illegal.

Safr is a ride-hailing Boston, Mass., startup formerly known as, “Chariot for Women,” that only dispatches female drivers and serves female customers. See Jane Go is another service with a similar philosophy, but See Jane Go has chosen to offer rides to men as long as they are accompanied by a female. If a sole male rider makes a request for See Jane Go, the sole male rider will automatically be redirected to Uber or Lyft.

Female drivers are able to dodge male riders, but do these measures help the services dodge a legal bullet?

The answer is still unclear. States like Massachusetts have passed legislation mandating background checks of drivers to help prevent acts of violence.

At this point, Uber doesn’t require fingerprint background checks – a measure that is mandatory for taxi drivers. Instead, Uber screens drivers by name and social security number – claiming that this method is more than sufficient. Without fingerprints, Uber may not be able to detect if a potential driver was charged for a crime, but just not yet convicted. The skipping of this critical information can compromise rider safety for the sake of recruiting drivers at a faster pace (to keep up with supply and demand).

Uber is currently brainstorming ways to decrease safety concerns. One potential avenue is through the development of self-driving cars – a concept the ride-hailing powerhouse has invested in heavily. This dream could become reality, but it does not seem that this is happening in the near future.

Another option is that female drivers on any of these ride-hailing apps can simply choose who they want to provide service to. Female riders can also decline a ride from a male driver – just a thought.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which enforces the 1964 Civil Rights Act, declined public comment on the legality of women-only ride-hailing services.

While companies like Safr and See Jane Go appear to be on the brink of litigation, they continue operation and may be encouraged by previous rulings. In 1998, the Governor of Massachusetts created a law that allowed for female-only gyms, which still stands strong today.

Just as a woman can request to see a female gynecologist if they are uncomfortable with a male physician, couldn’t a female request a female driver for safety reasons without penalty?

Can’t a service be created to fill this need? Will comfort and security concerns be enough to outweigh current discrimination law?

Both sides are backed with reason and precedent, but until major legislation is created or law forbids such services, it appears female-centric ride-hailing services will remain in full swing.

*Disclaimer – This is in no way to be considered legal advice. An attorney client relationship does not exist from your reading of this blog or your following any of the suggested courses of action above.