The CPUC said that just after the launch of the report, it was lawfully expected to look into the statements in the interest of public security. It demanded the day, time and locale of every documented assault, together with a description of the incident and names and contact facts for witnesses and “each person to whom the assault was documented.” It also purchased the identify of any person who labored on the report. It pledged to maintain any facts underneath seal.
Uber simply cannot trumpet the existence of this kind of a document but decline to supply the Commission with the information encompassing the statements and the authorship of said document.
Uber objected to the first ask for on the grounds that the launch of victims’ names without having their consent would contravene their legal rights and lead to added trauma. It also argued that there was no warranty of the confidentiality of delicate information. Nonetheless, in its newest ruling, the CPUC said it would allow for Uber to “provide a code or some other signifier relatively than a victim’s identify.”
In reaction, Uber advised that the fee transformed the procedures just after the point. “The CPUC has been insistent in its calls for that we launch the whole names and contact facts of sexual assault survivors without having their consent,” Uber spokesman Andrew Hasbun told the Write-up in a assertion. “A year later, the CPUC has transformed its tune: we can supply anonymized facts — nevertheless we are also topic to a $fifty nine million wonderful for not complying with the quite purchase the CPUC has essentially altered.”
He included that the purchase and wonderful may dissuade other providers from releasing similar studies, but the fee disagreed in its ruling. “Uber simply cannot trumpet the existence of this kind of a document but decline to supply the Commission with the information encompassing the statements and the authorship of said document,” the report reads. “The Commission would be remiss in its regulatory tasks if it experienced failed to perform a abide by-up inquiry”