Battery electric vehicles (BEV) as opposed to internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEV) are seen as a viable solution for reducing transportation related environmental impacts. There are however advantages and disadvantages to both alternatives. Environmental life cycle assessments (LCA) are used to quantify the environmental lifecycle impact of these vehicles. The social impact for people in the value chain of these alternatives has not yet been tested. For this purpose, a social lifecycle assessment (S-LCA) can be conducted. This paper compares BEVs and ICEVs in a S-LCA according to the UNEP/SETAC guidelines, using the Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment database (PSILCA). It was found that overall, the ICEV seems to have lower levels of social risk related to the life cycle than the BEV has. These differences are smaller or opposite when the lifetime of both vehicles is assumed to be longer. The raw material extraction seems to be a hotspot for social risks, especially the extraction of cobalt in the Democratic Republic of Congo has high risk levels. The paper includes the assessment of a future end of life scenario where BEV batteries are recycled. Recycling could reduce the amount of social risk related to the BEV. The utility of the PSILCA for this case and the general cost sensitivity of this method was discussed. It was concluded that while the PSILCA is useful to provide insights in social risks related to a products lifecycle and uncovering hotspots, it is not very suitable to compare product systems where a high number of assumptions are made. The results of this study should therefore not be used for generalisations.