Lyft is introducing a new feature that lets women and non-binary riders choose a preference to match with drivers of the same gender.

The ride-hailing company said it was a “highly requested feature” in a blog post Tuesday, saying the new feature allows women and non-binary people to “feel that much more confident” in using Lyft and also hopefully encourage more women to sign up to be drivers to access its “flexible earning opportunities.”

The service, called “Women+ Connect,” is rolling out in the coming months. Riders can turn on the option in the Lyft app, however the company warns that it’s not a guarantee that they’ll be matched with a women or non-binary person if one of those people aren’t nearby. Both the riders and drivers will need to opt-in to the feature for it work and riders must chose a gender for it to work.

  • Cleverdawny
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 年前

    The analogy here is providing an option for a customer at a restaurant to select which race or gender they want serving them. Yes, definitionally, it is discrimination by sex. Especially because no one is given the option to pick a male driver, this will just result in women receiving more ride requests while they’re active and driving.

    I can’t see how this would be anything but a slam dunk violation of federal law. Lyft is actively and obviously participating in discrimination on the basis of sex by enacting this policy.

    What they SHOULD be doing is raising driver pay and enacting real protections for their passengers which do NOT violate federal law.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 年前

      The fact that Lyft classifies their drivers as contractors rather than employees may allow them to get away with it.

      • Cleverdawny
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 年前

        I doubt it. Unless you think it would be legal for a company to preferentially contract with only white men, this would violate title II