Re:Uber ordered to pay $1.1M to blind woman refused rides
by lolinder on Monday April 05, 2021 @06:12PM
(#26705320)
This. It would be absurdly easy for Uber to allow riders to specify "I have a service animal" and drivers to specify "I have a dog allergy" (probably with a requirement to provide a doctor's note to avoid abuse). You simply don't pair those riders with those drivers.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Uber ordered to pay $1.1M to blind woman refused rides
by shagie on Monday April 05, 2021 @08:45PM
(#26706666)
The ADA doesn't require passengers to state that they have a service animal. Additionally, having that would likely open up Uber to additional liability for discrimination cases of people turning down rides (or marking that they have a dog allergy when they don't) and causing the rate or availability to be different for someone who has a situation that is covered by the ADA.
Re:Uber ordered to pay $1.1M to blind woman refused rides
by lolinder on Monday April 05, 2021 @11:48PM
(#26707773)
The availability difference is a concern. I wasn't picturing the drivers being made aware of the service animal ahead of time, which would eliminate discrimination concerns, assuming you could actually enforce that you have to have a real allergy.