An employer can be found negligent for harms caused by its employees' conduct if the employer knew

An employer can be found negligent for harms caused by its employees' conduct if the employer knew

Creepy driver responsibility of shuttle company

This week’s question comes from Janice G. in San Mateo, who asks:

Q: “I was being driven home from the airport to my house in San Diego in one of those shuttle van services. After dropping off two others, I was the last passenger. I had given the guy my address when I got into the van. The driver, a middle-aged guy started creeping me out as he asked me about myself such as whether I was single, married, had a boyfriend, etc. Then he started asking me what kind of sex I liked and started telling me what kind of things he liked to do. It made me afraid.

“As he pulled up to my apartment he said: “I hope I will see you again soon.” The next day I found a note in my mailbox saying that I should give him a call and left his name. I Googled him and found out, through Facebook and those background search companies, that he was a convicted felon with a history of sexual assault and kidnapping. I told the shuttle company and they said “that they would look into it.” I have heard nothing else from them. I am scared that this guy may come back to my house and attack me so I have left my apartment and I am staying with friends in San Mateo. It doesn’t seem right that I should have been exposed to a felon by the shuttle service. They say on their website that their drivers are all screened for criminal records. I called the police but they said that there was nothing they could do because all he did was talk about sex and he didn’t touch me. I won’t go back to my apartment. What are my rights?”

A: Janice, your concerns are understandable. You hired a service that says that its drivers are screened and it turns out that they couldn’t have been because if they had done even the simple Internet search that you did, they would have found out about his history. Employers have a duty to properly screen their employees for fitness for their assigned jobs. An employer can be held liable for damages to a third person (in this case you) when the employer has been negligent in the hiring or retaining of an employee who is incompetent or unfit.

As one California case states: “Liability for negligent hiring … is based upon the reasoning that if an enterprise hires individuals with characteristics which might pose a danger to customers or other employees, the enterprise should bear the loss caused by the wrongdoing of its incompetent or unfit employees.”

Therefore an employer can be found to be negligent for harms caused by its employees conduct if the employer knew, or should have known, that hiring the employee created a particular risk of harm that later occurred. A legal treatise called the Restatement Second of Agency, followed by California, set forth the legal principal that a person conducting an activity through servants or other agents is subject to liability for harm resulting from his conduct if he is negligent or reckless in the employment of improper persons or instrumentalities in work involving risk of harm to others.

The restatement goes on to explain that an agent may be incompetent because of his reckless or vicious disposition, and if a principal, without exercising due care in selection, employs a vicious person to do an act that necessarily brings him in contact with others while in the performance of a duty, he is subject to liability for harm caused by the vicious propensity. One who employs another to act for him is not liable merely because the one employed is incompetent, vicious or careless. If liability results, it is because, under the circumstances, the employer has not taken the care that a prudent person would take in selecting the person for the business in hand.

In 2006, the Restatement Third came out distilling the concept: “A principal who conducts an activity through an agent is subject to liability for harm to a third party caused by the agent’s conduct if the harm was caused by the principal’s negligence in selecting, training, retaining, supervising, or otherwise controlling the agent.”

The above represents the responsibility of the regular everyday employer. Employers in the business of transporting people are called common carriers. They not only have the obligation to act reasonably, they owe a greater duty of care to those they transport because they do so in exchange for compensation. Section 2100 of the California Civil Code sets forth the rule:

“A carrier of persons for reward must use the utmost care and diligence for their safe carriage [and] must provide everything necessary for that purpose.” Given the opportunity created by placing a felonious sexual offender and kidnapper in a position where he could use his job, and the cover of being a shuttle driver, to gain access to victims, the utmost care and diligence would require undertaking a thorough background search and, although driving a shuttle is not one of the job positions which the law precludes sexual offenders from obtaining, refusing to hire a driver convicted of sexual assault and kidnapping. You should contact a trial lawyer to help you protect yourself from the driver and hold the shuttle service accountable for the impact on your life.

California Civil CodeChristopher DolanFeaturesRestatement Second of AgencyRestatement Third

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at

Just Posted

Organizer Jas Florentino, left, explains the figures which represent 350 kidnapped Africans first sold as slaves in the United States in 1619 in sculptor Dana King’s “Monumental Reckoning.” The installation is in the space of the former Francis Scott Key monument in Golden Gate Park. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
What a reparations program would look like in The City

‘If there’s any place we can do it, it’s San Francisco’

Officer Joel Babbs at a protest outside the Hall of Justice in 2017 (Bay City News file photo)
The strange and troubling story of Joel Babbs: What it tells us about the SFPD

The bizarre and troubling career of a whistle-blowing San Francisco police officer… Continue reading

Bay Area soul and jazz great Ledisi headlined Stern Grove’s opening 2021 show. (Christopher Victorios/Special to The Examiner)
Sweet sounds, extra space at Stern Grove

Ledisi, The Seshen, La Doña play first free concert since pandemic hit

Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at a COVID-19 update at the City College of San Francisco mass vaccination site in April. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
Gavin Newsom under COVID: The governor dishes on his pandemic life

By Emily Hoeven CalMatters It was strange, after 15 months of watching… Continue reading

People fish at a dock at Islais Creek Park on Thursday, June 10, 2021. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
What Islais Creek tells us about rising sea levels in San Francisco

Islais Creek is an unassuming waterway along San Francisco’s eastern industrial shoreline,… Continue reading

Most Read