My dog isn't a service dog, he's just a friend, but sometimes I take the street car in to the office and my dog (Elvis) joins me. If it rains, or if i'm leaving in rush hour (when dogs are not allowed on transit here in Toronto), i take an uber or taxi home. Often Ubers reject me due to the dog, but i have no way of letting them know in advance other than by calling as soon as they accept (which i always do, but even when they say "yeah no worries" they often still reject after the call).
I just want to be able to mark that I have a dog with me, and for the uber drivers to know this when they accept. Surprising them with an animal is to no ones advantage.
We're talking about a Beagle, completely silent, normally just sleeps in cars, 22lbs, sits on my lap.
22 lbs ≈ 10 kg
From Australia i think in kg but constantly convert to lb for everyone else.
Q: I operate a private taxicab and I don't want animals in my taxi; they smell, shed hair and sometimes have "accidents." Am I violating the ADA if I refuse to pick up someone with a service animal?
A: Yes. Taxicab companies may not refuse to provide services to individuals with disabilities. Private taxicab companies are also prohibited from charging higher fares or fees for transporting individuals with disabilities and their service animals than they charge to other persons for the same or equivalent service.
"A driver-partner CANNOT lawfully deny service to riders with service animals because of allergies, religious objections, or a generalized fear of animals."
That seems very location dependent.
Anyway, unless you're constantly carrying around dogs or have unusually severe allergies, this seems like a minor irritant.
https://www.aaaai.org/ask-the-expert/dog-anaphylaxis
https://www.anaphylaxis.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Al...
"In a small number of cases, particularly among asthma sufferers, there can be the risk of a severe asthma attack, and there have been very occasional reports of the most severe, lifethreatening form of allergy (anaphylaxis). "
"You may also be advised to use a preventer (steroid) inhaler and nasal spray starting the day before any unavoidable exposure, for example a planned visit to a home where you know there is a cat. As stated above, if your doctor believes your symptoms could be very severe, you are likely to be prescribed adrenaline (also known as epinephrine) The adrenaline injectors prescribed in the UK at present are Emerade®, EpiPen® and Jext®."
Pets and the like are not protected under the ADA.
Service Animal Defined by Title II and Title III of the ADA. A service animal means any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.
The key here is 'do work or perform tasks'. As a driver, you can ask "What work or task is this animal individually trained for." Their answer will allow you to determine if the animal is considered a 'service animal' under the ADA.
> https://accessibility.uber.com/service-animal-policy/
I interpret this as "if you don't want dogs in your car and don't want to be near dogs, don't become an uber driver in the first place".
People have a choice whether or not to work for uber... If you have a religious phobia of dogs or legitimate allergy there are lots of possible choices of work where you have an extremely slim chance of ever encountering a dog.
Allowing drivers to opt in or out of providing adequate, and legally mandated, service should not be an option.
Since Uber still claims it's not an employer it's going to continue to not provide this, which means they'll face dual claims: from guide-dog owning passengers and allergic-to-dog drivers, both of which are being discriminated against by Uber's illegal practice.
They are independent contractors, that is a separate business entity. Which means, you're right that Uber is under no obligation to give accommodations to their drivers, since they are not an employer.
It's...not a situation I'm a fan of, but it's the current legal status quo.
Gotta love "disruption" /s
Whilst complying with the law. Self employment does not exempt you.
A disabled passenger would have grounds for a case against the "self employed" driver if that driver refused carriage, or did not stop when they saw a service animal.
> The vehicle is owned/leased by the driver not Uber
As are many (most?) taxis and private hire vehicles.
There are three questions there: is an severe dog allergy legally a disability, is the driver in a relationship which entitles accommodation (regular employment would normally qualify, being a contracted supplier of service might not), and is a reasonable accommodation available.
are people confusing "they" in the first sentence to mean the customer? or what's the angle here?
Regulatory authorities were/are not staffed to handle mass, individual violations.
And the Fed's continued to turn a blind eye. Ra-ra, "tech economy".
Like the people made miserable by their new AirBnB "neighbors". (Another "crowdsourcing" effort.) These services have victims. Often the same people regulation was designed, negotiated, and put into place over years and decades, to protect.
--
P.S. Like some unfortunate souls get larger payouts from insurance -- because of misfortune they'd rather have avoided. We pay a bit more for rides and hotel rooms, to make sure those with physical challenges have equal access.
And to make sure those who want to live in peace and safety, aren't victimized by unfettered opportunism.
Regulation goes wrong, sure. But ultimately, it's a process of governance -- here in the U.S., democratic governance. So, govern.
If you pass your governance off onto private entities, well, then that's who will own your government.
Today's election day, in my state. Primaries, here. Turnout will be abysmal. And then, people will complain about what they get. "Government doesn't work!"
Well, that's because you didn't.
The other issue is that we, as a society, subsidize the additional cost for the handicapped; I doubt that Uber subsidizes the additional cleaning for transporting a service dog.
If you are working as a commercial driver or employing commercial drivers then yes, complying with the law is very much "your fault".
Letting your dog loose in your own car is your own choice, but the trunk exists for unsecured cargo so in an accident, you don't have large objects flying around inside the cabin.
The correct solution would be to identify the handicapped passenger with animal and dispatch an appropriate vehicle. Instead, Uber puts both driver and passenger in danger with this policy.
A van with a carrier, or an SUV with a partitioned front/rear would suffice. Instead of calling Uber X, you call Uber Furry or somesuch.
I am not completely wheelchair-dependent, but I cannot get into a tall vehicle (like an SUV). Last time I used Lyft, I had to call a vehicle and just cross my fingers that I would be assigned to one that would work for me. If not, I had to cancel and try again. I would much rather have a special vehicle dispatched to me than be assigned a vehicle that is inadequate.
The only way this is generally true of privately-offered public accommodations covered by ADA is that the requirements impose additional costs on business which they pass on to all customers.
> I doubt that Uber subsidizes the additional cleaning for transporting a service dog.
The occasional need to do so is a cost of doing business which should factor into the minimum rate that drivers are willing to accept. No specific subsidy should be needed.
I'm sympathetic to this person wanting to take an uber, but uber needs to be able to allow drivers to mark their cars as "dog friendly". That way she can get a ride, and allergic drivers won't suffer.