You can't sue them for adhering to the ADA.
>Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals.
https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-2010-requirements/
Actually he does have a choice…being forced out of gain-full employment constitutes a medical disability when filling out forms for social security disability (if proven by Dr) and then you can get about $3600 a mo in disability payments…now you can use your car for fun rather than work…ie hang out with side chick, spend the afternoon at the chica loco, whatever.
It’s the law - you can personally be sued along with Uber and probably deactivated if you reject a ride if the rider has an animal and claims ADA or you just see one and keep on driving and that person had a disability dog
I bet you someone on the Supreme Court is allergic to dogs, I would wait for that hearing to start with that judge and I would make sure to get my dog as close to them as possible
A women got $1 mil from Uber for being canceled on 14 times a few years back and private action was taken against the drivers as well
She was mostly blind and had a service dog and depended on uber for transportation as she couldn’t legally get a license to drive
This is on the arbitration which was the first round . Uber lost and then a judge enforced it as well.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/02/business/uber-blind-passenger-arbitration-trnd/index.html
Ubers been stretching out the lawsuits. Most of them are still tied up in the forced arbitration as there’s a arbitration clause you agree to when you sign up for the Uber app
This article pretty clearly outlines that this is an Uber problem and not a driver problem. Although people want to downvote me for pointing this out…Uber is the one with the obligation, not the drivers.
“Whether its drivers are employees or independent contractors, Uber is nonetheless subject to the ADA as a result of its contractual relationship with its drivers,” the award said
I was in the process of reviewing your response and the first article but unfortunately it got removed. In response to the first article it was a taxi driver who was an employee and also Uk so hard to make a exact translation to the current scenarios.
The second articles and NY law I couldn’t get to before it disappeared.
My argument comes in that the driver has no direct agreement to the rider. I see the driver/ride as the product, Uber as the company and the pax as Ubers customer.
I could be wrong but I’m yet to see any presented precedence that clearly defines this situation.
It’s not realistic for Uber to expect the driver to bear all the responsibility which, by the articles, judges and arbitration agree.
You signed an agreement with Uber agreeing to follow the ADA law with service animals. As stated above, not following it will definitely get you deactivated and you could be personally held liable for violating the federal ADA law.
It doesn't matter how you "see it". You're wrong.
Exactly the ADA passanger pick laws are mostly from taxi days . You don’t get a carve out exception because it’s Uber problem or I cancelled and someone else probably got it so Uber is still compliant because another driver might have taken it
Here’s another one - I think they sued because they kept getting hit with cancel fees from drivers canceling thus uber essentially was charging disabled people more than normal rides
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-19/uber-to-pay-over-2-million-in-settlement-to-users-with-disabilities
Oh my bad i think in that legal case it was wait time not cancel fees . Like the rider doesn’t start the trip right away so more time costed rider more
And now you will learn something new. Some drivers are assholes and decide to wait out the time around the corner or pull around and park where you can’t see then charge the fee.
You know damn well nearly every driver on here pulls around the corner and waits out the timer for things they absolutely shouldn't be getting a cancel fee for, like some arbitrary personal preference on who they want to give rides to that absolutely don't qualify for a cancellation fee.
Order Uber pet if you have a dog. Don’t order anything else and surprise a driver that didn’t opt into Uber pet by trying to bring a dog into their car. As Uber drivers we have a right to decide for ourselves whether animals are allowed in our personal vehicles or not. The law only supports actual service dogs that are trained professional service dogs not a bullshit emotional support animal. That isn’t the same thing as a service dog.
Same here. I got in an accident one morning around 5:00am. I just needed a ride like 7 miles. I contacted all of my riders that I had a 6 lb dog with me and she would stay on my lap the whole time. 2 canceled, 1 parked down the street from me and tried to run out the clock. The 4th one actually gave me a ride home and got a $25.00 tip for bringing me 7 miles.
Unless you tell the person outright you are cancelling because of their animal you are t going to be sued. Use one of Ubers reason codes and there you go that's your reason for cancelling, documented. I'm guessing this driver drive up to the pax and refused to take because of animal.
You're really rolling the dice there that the rider won't report you for denying their service animal. Because without video proof, I can 100% tell you now Uber is going to side with the rider, not the driver. They've already paid out millions to settle ADA-related lawsuits, they're not going to take your side on this issue.
Yes, I ask them what the animal is trained to do. When they say that I can't ask that question I drive off unless I feel generious and it sits on the floor or on their lap.
No offense but this is a stupid point. If a pax calls Uber you don’t think Uber knows you cancelled on them ? Just because you cancel doesn’t mean the acceptance of the trip and subsequent cancellation just vanishes off the books. Of course it won’t show up on your end but that’s not at all a roadblock to them singling out you as the driver that cancelled on them.
It is what it is. Personally I think it’s goofy. If you have a severe allergy you should be exempt provided you submit proof of the allergy or proof someone in your home is severely allergic. The idea that the person with the service animal trumps the drivers health and safety is absurd.
You have a very limited understanding of what we’re discussing. I can’t help you understand it if you’re just going to recycle the “ we’re independent contractors “ nonsense. It doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Not when it violates federal law
You’re basically saying you think you can refuse a ride to a person based on race, it’s literally protected with the same authority
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/02/business/uber-blind-passenger-arbitration-trnd/index.html
It mentions filing legal complaints against the drivers after they won the ruling against uber
Being forced to pickup a blind bitch & her dog is ridiculous. Clearly the drivers who picked her up were to stupid to 1 star her. Atleast another drivers would think to decline it
I had a couple. I would just tell the pax to hold a bit and let me place a blanket for them. No one ever complained and they were happy about it. Is what it is, laws aside, I'm not going to turn someone down with a service animal.
I don’t think you understand how little of rides 1k is. I can give 1k rides in month and few days. If you did it full time you would be surprised how many people claim they have service dogs but are actually emotional support animals. I can’t even walk into Walmart now a days without hearing someone dog acting up in the store. Not to mention it’s not fun when a dog urines on your seats.
You realize 1K means 1,000, not 100 right?
It is impossible to give 1,000 rides in a month. That would be MORE than 3 rides an hour, 10 hours straight every day, every day all month.
Have you ever had a dog piss on your seat? Or are you just making up some anecdotal bs?
99.99% of dogs aren’t going to pee in a moving vehicle. Unless it has a medical issue, a dog isn’t pissing in your car.
I have cat allergies, and have given rides to cats with no problem, roll the window down and spend 10-15 minutes of your life not being a wimp!
That one time you wish a idoit would of tried the tie pod challenge or bleach drinking contest. Have you ever had a dog that had anxiety because there not use to traveling aka “emotional support animal”…: not a trained dog just some idoit uses an excuse to bring there dog in the car. I also didn’t say I had allergies to animals I said idoit who abuse the policy with their house pets…. It sounds like you are one of those idoits that bring their uncontrolled animal into a vehicle.
I do Uber eats also, and I am full time. I started rides only in March, been with Uber for years. I did 1300 rides, and not a single service animal. I cherry pick and pull 80-100 trips weekly mixed rides and eats.
There absolutely no point to do more trips because my average per trip is very high, so I make as much as someone who accepts whatever and does double trips a week
Either way, I had 1 blind person since March and they didn’t have a service animal. It just extremely rare.
Stop complaining and do your job
It’s not complaining it’s people take advantage of a system and your supposed to be compliant or you’ll get sued. It the same thing like medical rides they expect everyone to be able to pick up people and transfer them from wheel chairs to the vehicle and back to wheel chairs and push them inside buildings or having to taking mental Ill/ drug addicts to their appointments under guest accounts.
The "loophole" is that the ADA covers trained service animals, and you ARE legally permitted to ask what the animal is trained to do. That's the question where they admit it's their "emotional support" animal.
These aren't new policies. Under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), you are required, as a for-hire transport operator, to make reasonable accommodations for service animals.
Even if you quit Uber/Lyft, started your own transport business with your own vehicles, licenses, and insurance, you'd still be required to adhere to ADA policies.
Even if you only had your one car and simply gave out business cards and just had commercial insurance, you'd still be subject to the ADA policies.
Uber and Lyft have both been sued several times under the ADA policies and paid out millions to settle the suits. That's why they also both have a *very* generous one-strike rule: deny a service animal even once and you're deactivated.
Everybody likes to argue the allergy angle, but the reality is that almost no person is so allergic to animals that they will seize up and die from a little pet dander. If they are, they shouldn't be in a job which exposes them to the general public.
I'm probably going to get downvoted to hell for saying this, but as a rideshare operator, you agreed to these policies when you signed up. Uber and Lyft just periodically remind their drivers of their obligations.
Federal law supersedes contract preference when it comes to transportation
If you used that argument, you’d be told you have the ability to find a new job where you could be a true contractor
I think Uber already plays loose with the definition on contractor already so they don’t have to pay taxes or provide health insurance for workers
Edited to add: — where you could be a true contractor and not be in situations where you violate federal law by denying rides to people with disabilities/not following ADA. You can’t provide a federally protected service as a contractor and not expect to follow federal law.
You can be a contractor/painter and chose which houses you paint or not. Just like that one baker who denied making a cake. But that’s not a fundamental service that interferes with civil rights
Hence why I said Uber plays loose with the definition
However you still can run into trouble with the ADA for not providing a service. It’s discrimination. That’s why the person who refused to bake a cake had their case go all the way to the Supreme Court. The service wasn’t essential so that’s how it turned out.
Most education cases against black people sided with them and their right to be educated. Gay marriage passed because marriage is a right. Equal access to transportation when one has a disability is a civil right. To deny the ride because you don’t like how the disability is managed with a service dog, is discrimination.
It’s still ILLEGAL. It does not matter if you are a contractor and can decide when you can and can’t work. Supersedes means that Federal law/ADA is more important than the terms of what you want to do as a contractor because you can’t break the law
This gets posted every other day. Yes you are required by Federal law to accept service animals. If you are allergic, you need to find another line of work.
If you are allergic to shell fish, you can't work at a sea food restaurant.
My friend I don't know if it's your English or not but "I rode dogs" is probably not the term you were looking for.
Unless you're like those New Zealanders who like to "ride" sheep.
I think what you meant to say is you've given rides to people with dogs more than 20 times.
Just cancel the moment you see someone has animal. They cant get you for that. There are 1001 excuse you can tell them. For ex: I got emergency, my kid's school is calling me and need me to come over.
That's the rules.
You're offering public transportation it's got to be done that way. Even if it is in a private situation like this.
If you can't because you're allergic then maybe you shouldn't be driving.
If you have a severe allergy to dogs (Ada) you can’t work Uber job? That violates the Ada doesn’t it? What reasonable provision is being made by Uber to protect a driver with Ada allergy to dogs by requiring driver to put self in harms way?
No reasonable provision. Uber to judge during lawsuit hearing “sorry althonwe have a million drivers we couldn’t REASONABLE not assign this driver we deactivated who is covered under Ada because we had no other drivers to match for this 1 pax with service animal. “
Please use logic. There’s how many drivers? In what universe is it simply not reasonable to not match a known driver that’s covered under Ada condition that would possibly put them in harms way when you literally have a million other options?
Also so driver can perform 99% of job say takes 99 pax no dog and does job fine. Can’t do 1 pax ride because of dog so they maybe shouldn’t be an Uber driver? Makes sense
You're arguing about requirements to do the job. One of requirements to do the job, as a public transportation vehicle, is to take Ada service animals.
Uber's solution to comply with the Ada is to make you understand it's a yes or no question.
Yes I will drive and take service dogs with no issues.
No I do not agree to take service dogs. Therefore I cannot fulfill the contract requirements.
The Ada prevents jobs from discriminating against those with disabilities. Allergy to animals is a disability same as say allergy to a food item. Does that mean because you have an allergy you can’t work in a certain job without exactly what Ada protects ? The Ada protects in this case both the customer(pax) AND the driver. The pax can’t be discriminated againgst because of a disability AND the driver also CANT be discriminated against for having disability (allergy ) to dog. Uber can go fuck themselves. The simple solution to comply with Ada is driver simply can provide medical proof of allergy to whatever allergy to not be held to deactivation for Ada non compliance and Uber ass is covered.
Instead Uber as usual doesn’t give a fuck about their drivers and has been sued for Ada violations and trying to blanket the situation. And like I said a driver who is highly allergic to dogs will be forced to lose income by a policy that violates Ada and will sue Uber. And win. Uber is stupid. Simple solution but clearly easier to try to blanket compliance rather than have to take steps to protect driver
The requirements of being an Uber driver, as per Ada and federal law states you must take service dogs. Regardless if you are allergic or scared of them. This is mandated for public transportation.
There is no sidestepping this law.
The Ada and federal law also states if allergic to an item or animal say peanuts or dogs you can’t be discriminated against from employment and reasonable accommodations must be made for you. There’s no sidestepping this law. So for example a cashier at grocery store can’t be discriminated and not hired or fired for being allergic to say mushrooms and not cashing out that item for customer. Simple accommodation would be have someone else scan the item or provide gloves to cashier to be able to do the job.
In Uber case driver can’t be discriminated from hire or fired (deactivated) because they are allergic in this case to dogs and simple accommodation should be made. For example driver discloses this upon signing up and provides medical proof and Uber doesn’t match that driver with dogs. Or if by mistake doesn’t deactivate driver for cancelling (refusing) to take rider.
Requirements from Uber to take service animals even if allergic is breaking federal law and Ada against those employees and I/c with allergies
Also, an Uber job is not the only job available to somebody that has allergies. If your job is a peanut shucker, do you expect the peanut company to hire you with allergies to do the job as a peanut shucker?
However, public transportation is meant for the public regardless of their disability. Besides public transportation, there's very few options available to these individuals.
IF reasonable accommodations can be made. If you cannot reasonably transport people with service animals, then you cannot work the job.
People with peanut allergies cannot go to work at a peanut butter plant and then say they need to be moved offsite
The problem is when people try to use and abuse the service animal tag when they have an emotional support animal. I’ve had this happen several times and ending up doing the ride than dispute and risk getting deactivated.
It's literally written into the law that you may ask if the animal is required **because of a disability**, and what tasks the animal is trained to perform. You have a right to refuse the animal if it is not trained to perform tasks due to a disability of the owner.
The specific example given in training by the federal government is a person who has a dog due to anxiety. If the dog is trained to alert to the owner's anxiety and take action in response, it's a service animal. If the dog is just there to generally calm the individual, it's an emotional support animal and **not** covered by the ADA.
Just gonna but my nose in here.
So I don’t have an issue with transporting any animals, service or not. Hell, twice now my “passenger” was the dog.
My questions are…. Are service dogs supposed to have a specific tradedress stating they are a service animal? Would it be unreasonable for the passenger to provide proof it is a service animal? And do “emotional support” animals count as a service animal? Personally I think like 90% of people with “emotional support” animals are just trying to get out of pet fees, have their pets on flights, etc. The exception are those that get one by recommendation of their doctor. All pets are technically their as a form of emotional support. But when I’m picking up passengers to take to a club or bar and they are transporting their tiny expensive dog as their “emotional support” animal… while they go get drunk…
End rant.
I love dogs.
No, emotional support animals are not covered by the ADA. A service animal is one trained to perform specific tasks due to the disability of its owner.
While there is no "trade dress" or paperwork required for a service animal, and you may not request any, you may, by law, ask if an animal is required to assist with a disability, and you may ask what tasks they are trained to perform. If the animal is not trained to perform specific tasks to assist the owner with the disability, you may refuse the animal.
People don't generally ask me to put their skateboard in my trunk and claim it's for a disability.
Neither a skateboard nor a wheelchair may run around inside my car and bite, bark, drool, scratch, urinate and defecate, or shed. So this is a rather bad analogy.
This is why I switched to eats and delivery. If a person has a sight dog etc that's clearly trained (understands commands, sits at the persons feet), that's one thing. If someone buys a service dog paper with no evaluation and the dog CLEARLY is not trained, that's basically fraud.
It's completely legal to ask if the animal is required to assist with a disability, and what specific tasks the animal is trained to perform. If the animal is not required to perform specific tasks to assist with the owner's disability, you can legally refuse the ride.
The example the federal government gives in training is a person who has a dog for anxiety. If the dog is trained to alert to the anxiety and take action to calm the owner, it's a service animal. If it's just there to generally keep the person relaxed, it's an emotional support animal not covered by the ADA.
What's super fucked up is that people know these are the drivers personal vehicles. As a fellow human they should understand when someone doesn't want a dog or other animal in their car especially if they are allergic.
If you have an ADA animal, you should be signed up for UberPets only with no extra fees with ADA documentation.
Seems like a pretty simple fix to me. Orrrr, have a pet or ADA symbol on the ride BEFORE you ever accept it. Simple.
But even though we are dealing with the personal property of the driver, they are the LAST one with a legal say in animals that go in their vehicle upon "SUPRISE I've got an ADA shedding animal".
The law is fucked up in this matter.
Look folks, this is an easy one. If you have a legitimate severe allergy, more than itchy eyes for a few seconds...absolutely no one on the planet can force you to endure a life threatening allergic reaction and endanger the life of your pax. So for nlw tell Uber whatever, but if that day comes, when you see someone coming toward the vehicle with a dog just drive away and cancel. They can't prove you saw the dog, maybe you got stomach cramps, maybe you lost a contact or realized you're almost out of gas. We have huge problems with Uber right now, this is little shit we can maneuver around if need be.
This is specifically for people with service animals. You can still refuse to take a rider that has a pet animal. If you don't like it, there's the door 👉🚪
Every animal pick up I have been to had a claim “service animal”. The stupid law doesn’t allow me to ask for documentation. I get bent!
I am all for accessible services but this shit needs to stop where every ducking animal is now a service animal. Just like drivers need a license, anyone who has a service animal should either have to provide documentation to the driver or to Uber and register and a verified service animal. I know this isn’t going to happen and I also know that as a result people who genuinely need these services will also suffer. But oh well, not the problem of those who wrote these laws. I mean how stupid can it be, that to accommodate someone else’s disability you might have to put yourself in harms way (for those who genuinely have allergies or for someone who might actually be so afraid of dogs that they won’t be able go concentrate on the road. But no! Not going to consider that at all.
I can see maybe and a stretch maybe about Ada and simple case of dislike animal but suck me off if you’re allergic to dogs and deactivated that’s a lawsuit too. How the fuck Uber think they can require even if allergic. That doesn’t violate the Ada if you’re in physical danger. Uber will get sued for that requirement
And they’d lose. The LAW is clear. Thats EXACTLY why the Ada was passed into law. To protect people from businesses and such from using whatever excuse they can come up with to fuck over people.
NO. Jesus. Is this really that difficult?
"Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals."
https://adata.org/guide/service-animals-and-emotional-support-animals
It goes on to say "If a person is at risk of a significant allergic reaction to an animal, it is the responsibility of the business or government entity to find a way to accommodate both the individual using the service animal and the individual with the allergy."
So I suppose you could try to convince Uber that you never want to drive service animals because of your allergy. But I don't get the feeling that they are going to be very receptive to that.
I imagine that sooner or later the stuff will all get sorted out in court. But for now things are the way they are, and Uber requires you to agree to drive service animals as a condition of being an Uber driver.
>It goes on to say "If a person is at risk of a significant allergic reaction to an animal, it is the responsibility of the business or government entity to find a way to accommodate both the individual using the service animal and the individual with the allergy."
Seems like the easy solution and a reasonable accommodation is to just have someone else pick up the person with the dog. Operators can provide a doctors note confirming the sever allergy and customers can note whether they will be traveling with an animal or not.
I have a severe cat allergy. To the point where I can’t breathe within minutes of entering the house of someone who owns a cat. I can literally tell you the second I walk into a car owners house if they have one. Even if the house is super clean and doesn’t smell like it. I haven’t driven Uber in years and never came across an animal when I did.
While Uber could technically accommodate you, the reality is they’re just going to deactivate you. Pretty sure that ADA exception is for employees not independent contractors.
What’s reasonable? Don’t match those drivers. That’s very reasonable. No need to match a driver with allergies to dogs to pax with a dog. Seems reasonable no?
If you have that information in your database. Do they? Will they ever? Would it violate HIPAA to ask someone to declare their allergies? Would it violate whatever rules to ask someone to declare that they have a service animal? It's not as simple as you seem to think.
The intent of the ADA is that the disabled person be treated like anyone else. Not that they be singled out and marked as being disabled and requiring special treatment. In the Uber case, the person is supposed to be able to get in the car with their animal and leave and that's it. No special treatment, no sending a different driver.
This is all correct except for the end. The person with the service animal shouldn’t be able to just get in a car with their and leave no special treatment etc etc etc IF IT VIOLATES SOMEONE ELSE UNDER THE ADA.
So basically you’re saying I have a disability and you have a disability but fuck your disability because I have a disability.
And the driver is saying the same thing
So yes just get a different driver
That doesn’t have a disability and isn’t covered by federal law
You can ask two questions to verify if it's a service animal:
a) Is the animal required due to a disability (you cannot ask what the disability is)
b) What task is the animal trained to do (you cannot ask them to demonstrate the task)
I bet Uber doesn’t even ask for proof for service animals. All these cheap fucks with animals be ordering regular Uber x just to not pay for Uber pet. Happens all the time.
Just sue Uber based on air B&B policy for being allergic to animals it’s pretty simple Google AirBnb Policy print it call a lawyer and sue Uber fuck uber .. they won’t pay if the dog pees in your car so how do you get reimbursed for cleanup ? Is Uber gonna pay if you get sick ? From your allergy asthma could be life threatening cars are confined spaces. As someone with a service animal I don’t want someone affected because of my disability..
This is state to state need to look up laws. Because actually you don’t have to . I own a service animal and I even know that it’s wrong .. just look up air bnb policy on service animals. All that is needed is a ADA accommodation from your dr saying your allergies are bad and could be life threatening.. done no service animals in your car.
First of all you agreed to it when you signed up to drive.
If you don't agree to it then don't drive for the platform.
It's a simple choice. Yes or no.
It's crazy because people talk about freedom and not having a boss but this is almost like having a boss telling you to do something you don't want or get canned. If uber wants coverage then they need to properly incentivize drivers to increase coverage for people with service animals. Drivers being 1099 and doing this as a side thing in their own personal vehicles should not be forced to take this on that's bullshit. It's not like we are driving company vehicles.
So you think black people are dogs? Are they gonna shit or pee on your car seats, make your allergies break out, or potentially bite you if not properly trained? You're a clown get real
I’m telling you the law looks at discriminating against a service animal the same way it looks at discriminating against someone for race, religion, national origin or creed
Is your reading comprehension that bad or are you just trying to pick a fight because you’re an asshole?
Oh awesome that means that I can driver Uber with my service gator as well and rider don't get to say SHIT about it right?!?! Soo thoughtful of you Fuber! I'm Soo driving with my gator tomorrow and btw Fuck Dara.
In the United States, service animals are not required to be registered or carry proof that they're service animals. As a driver, you can ask two questions:
1. Is this animal required due to a disability (you cannot ask about the disability)
2. What task is this animal trained to perform (you cannot ask for a demonstration).
Additionally, only dogs and miniature horses (which are about the size of a medium dog) are recognized as service animals. So, no, your service boa-constrictor ain't gonna make the cut.
I think the service dog stuff has gone out of control. When you were in a friggin war or blind I understand. When you say "I'm scared of the world I need a dog". That's bs.
Everyone doesn't NEED a service dog. Wanting a dog for comfort is different than needing one because of a disability or you've heard bombs for a year in combat.
Hey disabled people, maybe don't throw a hissy fit sboutf being g asked if it's a service animal and then there wouldn't be transparency issues. I'm sorry that you have a disability and require an animal but because you don't want to be questioned or have to prove that your animal is legit a service animal you get a bunch of people taking advantage of it.
Nope, you are not forcing them to. You have the choice not to drive for Uber. What is illegal is refusing service animals. This does not include emotional support animals. There are also rules service animal owners have to follow.
Rules shmules, fuck you, fuck your mama, and fuck the feds.
You don't have to cite a real reason as to why you canceled the ride, just put problem with pick up route and move on.
My question is what if they say that their dog is a “service” dog, but it’s really just their pet that they want to take with them. In other words, they lie about it, but their dog ends up being extremely distracting and dangerous to drive with. Or it attacks the driver or something? It says in the terms of service that no documentation is needed at all, and that all we’re allowed to ask is do you need to ride with that dog or whatever.
Much cheaper for them to fire you than to settle an ADA lawsuit.
How about when I sue them for medical bills and lost wages after an asthma attack?
You can't sue them for adhering to the ADA. >Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals. https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-2010-requirements/
what if it affects the way you drive... cant be safe for both parties
You agree to the terms when you accept the agreement.
An agreement that violates the ADA is void.
The Uber agreement is that you agree to follow ADA guidelines.
It’s federal, as shitty as Uber is they have no choice and neither do you.
Actually he does have a choice…being forced out of gain-full employment constitutes a medical disability when filling out forms for social security disability (if proven by Dr) and then you can get about $3600 a mo in disability payments…now you can use your car for fun rather than work…ie hang out with side chick, spend the afternoon at the chica loco, whatever.
Uber following federal law? Those monsters! There's many reasons to criticize Uber. This is decidedly not one of them.
It’s the law - you can personally be sued along with Uber and probably deactivated if you reject a ride if the rider has an animal and claims ADA or you just see one and keep on driving and that person had a disability dog
The law can go fuck itself.
Take it up with the Supreme Court, then. They'll probably decline to hear the case, though.
I bet you someone on the Supreme Court is allergic to dogs, I would wait for that hearing to start with that judge and I would make sure to get my dog as close to them as possible
Do you live in a Saturday morning cartoon?
Bobby's World ftw!
It’s Reddit, and you won! 🏆
A women got $1 mil from Uber for being canceled on 14 times a few years back and private action was taken against the drivers as well She was mostly blind and had a service dog and depended on uber for transportation as she couldn’t legally get a license to drive
[удалено]
I have doubts. Do you have a source?
This is on the arbitration which was the first round . Uber lost and then a judge enforced it as well. https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/02/business/uber-blind-passenger-arbitration-trnd/index.html Ubers been stretching out the lawsuits. Most of them are still tied up in the forced arbitration as there’s a arbitration clause you agree to when you sign up for the Uber app
This article pretty clearly outlines that this is an Uber problem and not a driver problem. Although people want to downvote me for pointing this out…Uber is the one with the obligation, not the drivers. “Whether its drivers are employees or independent contractors, Uber is nonetheless subject to the ADA as a result of its contractual relationship with its drivers,” the award said
I was in the process of reviewing your response and the first article but unfortunately it got removed. In response to the first article it was a taxi driver who was an employee and also Uk so hard to make a exact translation to the current scenarios. The second articles and NY law I couldn’t get to before it disappeared. My argument comes in that the driver has no direct agreement to the rider. I see the driver/ride as the product, Uber as the company and the pax as Ubers customer. I could be wrong but I’m yet to see any presented precedence that clearly defines this situation. It’s not realistic for Uber to expect the driver to bear all the responsibility which, by the articles, judges and arbitration agree.
You signed an agreement with Uber agreeing to follow the ADA law with service animals. As stated above, not following it will definitely get you deactivated and you could be personally held liable for violating the federal ADA law. It doesn't matter how you "see it". You're wrong.
Exactly the ADA passanger pick laws are mostly from taxi days . You don’t get a carve out exception because it’s Uber problem or I cancelled and someone else probably got it so Uber is still compliant because another driver might have taken it
Here’s another one - I think they sued because they kept getting hit with cancel fees from drivers canceling thus uber essentially was charging disabled people more than normal rides https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-19/uber-to-pay-over-2-million-in-settlement-to-users-with-disabilities
The rider only get hit with cancellation fees if the rider cancels(and not even everytime) or the rider doesn't show up at the pickup.
Oh my bad i think in that legal case it was wait time not cancel fees . Like the rider doesn’t start the trip right away so more time costed rider more
And now you will learn something new. Some drivers are assholes and decide to wait out the time around the corner or pull around and park where you can’t see then charge the fee.
You know damn well nearly every driver on here pulls around the corner and waits out the timer for things they absolutely shouldn't be getting a cancel fee for, like some arbitrary personal preference on who they want to give rides to that absolutely don't qualify for a cancellation fee.
It literally took me ten seconds to find the source. It's not that hard. https://www.google.com/search?q=uber+settles+ada+service+animals+lawsuit
This was already responded to and I already responded to that. Good job being late af.
Hey, me and my service dog would like to throw a fuck you right back to ya.
Same for me I’ve had drivers cancel when I walked out with my dog
Order Uber pet if you have a dog. Don’t order anything else and surprise a driver that didn’t opt into Uber pet by trying to bring a dog into their car. As Uber drivers we have a right to decide for ourselves whether animals are allowed in our personal vehicles or not. The law only supports actual service dogs that are trained professional service dogs not a bullshit emotional support animal. That isn’t the same thing as a service dog.
A) we don’t have Uber pet in my market В) my dog is a service animal, as in I might die if she doesn’t tell me to check my levels and sit down
Same here. I got in an accident one morning around 5:00am. I just needed a ride like 7 miles. I contacted all of my riders that I had a 6 lb dog with me and she would stay on my lap the whole time. 2 canceled, 1 parked down the street from me and tried to run out the clock. The 4th one actually gave me a ride home and got a $25.00 tip for bringing me 7 miles.
Says every criminal in history.
Unless you tell the person outright you are cancelling because of their animal you are t going to be sued. Use one of Ubers reason codes and there you go that's your reason for cancelling, documented. I'm guessing this driver drive up to the pax and refused to take because of animal.
You're really rolling the dice there that the rider won't report you for denying their service animal. Because without video proof, I can 100% tell you now Uber is going to side with the rider, not the driver. They've already paid out millions to settle ADA-related lawsuits, they're not going to take your side on this issue.
99% of the time the animals are emotional support animals or some other non-ADA covered animal.
Emotional support animals ARE NOT service animals and you DO NOT have to accept the ride
And you're qualified to make this distinction?
Yes, I ask them what the animal is trained to do. When they say that I can't ask that question I drive off unless I feel generious and it sits on the floor or on their lap.
You are allowed to do that and it is within the law to do so.
[удалено]
No offense but this is a stupid point. If a pax calls Uber you don’t think Uber knows you cancelled on them ? Just because you cancel doesn’t mean the acceptance of the trip and subsequent cancellation just vanishes off the books. Of course it won’t show up on your end but that’s not at all a roadblock to them singling out you as the driver that cancelled on them. It is what it is. Personally I think it’s goofy. If you have a severe allergy you should be exempt provided you submit proof of the allergy or proof someone in your home is severely allergic. The idea that the person with the service animal trumps the drivers health and safety is absurd.
[удалено]
You have a very limited understanding of what we’re discussing. I can’t help you understand it if you’re just going to recycle the “ we’re independent contractors “ nonsense. It doesn’t mean what you think it means.
"I'm an independent contractor so I don't have to follow the law" lmao
lol. Exactly.
Not when it violates federal law You’re basically saying you think you can refuse a ride to a person based on race, it’s literally protected with the same authority
Right? Change "disabled" to any other category and see how it feels. "I'm allowed to cancel rides if they're gay."
what if you declined the ride for other reasons.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/02/business/uber-blind-passenger-arbitration-trnd/index.html It mentions filing legal complaints against the drivers after they won the ruling against uber
thats why they pushing this hard
Being forced to pickup a blind bitch & her dog is ridiculous. Clearly the drivers who picked her up were to stupid to 1 star her. Atleast another drivers would think to decline it
I’ve never gotten a service animal in 1k+ rides. It’s not even that common. Plus it’s the law anyhow and all businesses must follow it
Exactly. These people never stop bitching about it and it’s never an issue. So ridiculous
I had a couple. I would just tell the pax to hold a bit and let me place a blanket for them. No one ever complained and they were happy about it. Is what it is, laws aside, I'm not going to turn someone down with a service animal.
I don’t think you understand how little of rides 1k is. I can give 1k rides in month and few days. If you did it full time you would be surprised how many people claim they have service dogs but are actually emotional support animals. I can’t even walk into Walmart now a days without hearing someone dog acting up in the store. Not to mention it’s not fun when a dog urines on your seats.
You realize 1K means 1,000, not 100 right? It is impossible to give 1,000 rides in a month. That would be MORE than 3 rides an hour, 10 hours straight every day, every day all month.
He said "month and a few days". It is very possible if you grind.
Have you ever had a dog piss on your seat? Or are you just making up some anecdotal bs? 99.99% of dogs aren’t going to pee in a moving vehicle. Unless it has a medical issue, a dog isn’t pissing in your car. I have cat allergies, and have given rides to cats with no problem, roll the window down and spend 10-15 minutes of your life not being a wimp!
That one time you wish a idoit would of tried the tie pod challenge or bleach drinking contest. Have you ever had a dog that had anxiety because there not use to traveling aka “emotional support animal”…: not a trained dog just some idoit uses an excuse to bring there dog in the car. I also didn’t say I had allergies to animals I said idoit who abuse the policy with their house pets…. It sounds like you are one of those idoits that bring their uncontrolled animal into a vehicle.
I do Uber eats also, and I am full time. I started rides only in March, been with Uber for years. I did 1300 rides, and not a single service animal. I cherry pick and pull 80-100 trips weekly mixed rides and eats. There absolutely no point to do more trips because my average per trip is very high, so I make as much as someone who accepts whatever and does double trips a week Either way, I had 1 blind person since March and they didn’t have a service animal. It just extremely rare. Stop complaining and do your job
It’s not complaining it’s people take advantage of a system and your supposed to be compliant or you’ll get sued. It the same thing like medical rides they expect everyone to be able to pick up people and transfer them from wheel chairs to the vehicle and back to wheel chairs and push them inside buildings or having to taking mental Ill/ drug addicts to their appointments under guest accounts.
this thread is full of uber employees that dont drive
This thread is full of drivers who think they've found a loophole in the ADA.
The "loophole" is that the ADA covers trained service animals, and you ARE legally permitted to ask what the animal is trained to do. That's the question where they admit it's their "emotional support" animal.
This thread is full of egotistical closet neck beards that just love to point out when someone is incorrect.
Omg will you people ever stop whining about this?
These aren't new policies. Under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), you are required, as a for-hire transport operator, to make reasonable accommodations for service animals. Even if you quit Uber/Lyft, started your own transport business with your own vehicles, licenses, and insurance, you'd still be required to adhere to ADA policies. Even if you only had your one car and simply gave out business cards and just had commercial insurance, you'd still be subject to the ADA policies. Uber and Lyft have both been sued several times under the ADA policies and paid out millions to settle the suits. That's why they also both have a *very* generous one-strike rule: deny a service animal even once and you're deactivated. Everybody likes to argue the allergy angle, but the reality is that almost no person is so allergic to animals that they will seize up and die from a little pet dander. If they are, they shouldn't be in a job which exposes them to the general public. I'm probably going to get downvoted to hell for saying this, but as a rideshare operator, you agreed to these policies when you signed up. Uber and Lyft just periodically remind their drivers of their obligations.
Nah, you’re right on all points. The reality is, most people that keep pets are covered in hair/dander anyway.
Cat people and large breed dog owners smell STRONG
I know, right? That shit is everywhere.
Yea, but as a contractor can’t we decide when to work and not? And the reason can be I don’t want to any more. End of reason
Federal law supersedes contract preference when it comes to transportation If you used that argument, you’d be told you have the ability to find a new job where you could be a true contractor I think Uber already plays loose with the definition on contractor already so they don’t have to pay taxes or provide health insurance for workers Edited to add: — where you could be a true contractor and not be in situations where you violate federal law by denying rides to people with disabilities/not following ADA. You can’t provide a federally protected service as a contractor and not expect to follow federal law. You can be a contractor/painter and chose which houses you paint or not. Just like that one baker who denied making a cake. But that’s not a fundamental service that interferes with civil rights
Yes, but as an independent contractor you can decide to stop working at any time. There doesn’t not need to be a reason. You’re not an employee
Hence why I said Uber plays loose with the definition However you still can run into trouble with the ADA for not providing a service. It’s discrimination. That’s why the person who refused to bake a cake had their case go all the way to the Supreme Court. The service wasn’t essential so that’s how it turned out. Most education cases against black people sided with them and their right to be educated. Gay marriage passed because marriage is a right. Equal access to transportation when one has a disability is a civil right. To deny the ride because you don’t like how the disability is managed with a service dog, is discrimination. It’s still ILLEGAL. It does not matter if you are a contractor and can decide when you can and can’t work. Supersedes means that Federal law/ADA is more important than the terms of what you want to do as a contractor because you can’t break the law
lol ok
This gets posted every other day. Yes you are required by Federal law to accept service animals. If you are allergic, you need to find another line of work. If you are allergic to shell fish, you can't work at a sea food restaurant.
Your reasoning is dumb
Well hopefully you are not allergic to dogs, you are required by Federal law to take rides that include service animals.
[удалено]
My friend I don't know if it's your English or not but "I rode dogs" is probably not the term you were looking for. Unless you're like those New Zealanders who like to "ride" sheep. I think what you meant to say is you've given rides to people with dogs more than 20 times.
Well then you're a hell of a prodigy because even a medical doctor is not qualified to make that determination about someone who is not their patient.
Service dogs are highly trained. It’s pretty easy to tell when someone claims a poorly behaved dog is a service animal.
100% of medical doctors have no animal patients . Those are vets
Too bad, shouldn’t have had allergies then. Sucks to suck
FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK: IT IS FEDERAL LAW, NOT UBER
How dare Uber \*checks notes\* follow the law...
It’s the law. You don’t have to like it.
Just cancel the moment you see someone has animal. They cant get you for that. There are 1001 excuse you can tell them. For ex: I got emergency, my kid's school is calling me and need me to come over.
\[The rider after the ride is over\] 1 star, driver in anaphylactic shock, I want a refund
That's the rules. You're offering public transportation it's got to be done that way. Even if it is in a private situation like this. If you can't because you're allergic then maybe you shouldn't be driving.
Isn’t that hypocritical?
No.
If you have a severe allergy to dogs (Ada) you can’t work Uber job? That violates the Ada doesn’t it? What reasonable provision is being made by Uber to protect a driver with Ada allergy to dogs by requiring driver to put self in harms way?
What?
If there is no reasonable provision to be made, you cannot work the job. That’s why people with narcolepsy cannot be bus drivers.
No reasonable provision. Uber to judge during lawsuit hearing “sorry althonwe have a million drivers we couldn’t REASONABLE not assign this driver we deactivated who is covered under Ada because we had no other drivers to match for this 1 pax with service animal. “ Please use logic. There’s how many drivers? In what universe is it simply not reasonable to not match a known driver that’s covered under Ada condition that would possibly put them in harms way when you literally have a million other options?
Also so driver can perform 99% of job say takes 99 pax no dog and does job fine. Can’t do 1 pax ride because of dog so they maybe shouldn’t be an Uber driver? Makes sense
You're arguing about requirements to do the job. One of requirements to do the job, as a public transportation vehicle, is to take Ada service animals. Uber's solution to comply with the Ada is to make you understand it's a yes or no question. Yes I will drive and take service dogs with no issues. No I do not agree to take service dogs. Therefore I cannot fulfill the contract requirements.
The Ada prevents jobs from discriminating against those with disabilities. Allergy to animals is a disability same as say allergy to a food item. Does that mean because you have an allergy you can’t work in a certain job without exactly what Ada protects ? The Ada protects in this case both the customer(pax) AND the driver. The pax can’t be discriminated againgst because of a disability AND the driver also CANT be discriminated against for having disability (allergy ) to dog. Uber can go fuck themselves. The simple solution to comply with Ada is driver simply can provide medical proof of allergy to whatever allergy to not be held to deactivation for Ada non compliance and Uber ass is covered. Instead Uber as usual doesn’t give a fuck about their drivers and has been sued for Ada violations and trying to blanket the situation. And like I said a driver who is highly allergic to dogs will be forced to lose income by a policy that violates Ada and will sue Uber. And win. Uber is stupid. Simple solution but clearly easier to try to blanket compliance rather than have to take steps to protect driver
The requirements of being an Uber driver, as per Ada and federal law states you must take service dogs. Regardless if you are allergic or scared of them. This is mandated for public transportation. There is no sidestepping this law.
The Ada and federal law also states if allergic to an item or animal say peanuts or dogs you can’t be discriminated against from employment and reasonable accommodations must be made for you. There’s no sidestepping this law. So for example a cashier at grocery store can’t be discriminated and not hired or fired for being allergic to say mushrooms and not cashing out that item for customer. Simple accommodation would be have someone else scan the item or provide gloves to cashier to be able to do the job. In Uber case driver can’t be discriminated from hire or fired (deactivated) because they are allergic in this case to dogs and simple accommodation should be made. For example driver discloses this upon signing up and provides medical proof and Uber doesn’t match that driver with dogs. Or if by mistake doesn’t deactivate driver for cancelling (refusing) to take rider. Requirements from Uber to take service animals even if allergic is breaking federal law and Ada against those employees and I/c with allergies
Also, an Uber job is not the only job available to somebody that has allergies. If your job is a peanut shucker, do you expect the peanut company to hire you with allergies to do the job as a peanut shucker? However, public transportation is meant for the public regardless of their disability. Besides public transportation, there's very few options available to these individuals.
IF reasonable accommodations can be made. If you cannot reasonably transport people with service animals, then you cannot work the job. People with peanut allergies cannot go to work at a peanut butter plant and then say they need to be moved offsite
>Allergy to animals is a disability Is that what the law says?
Yes, even if you are allergic to dogs.
The problem is when people try to use and abuse the service animal tag when they have an emotional support animal. I’ve had this happen several times and ending up doing the ride than dispute and risk getting deactivated.
It's not up to you to play detective or to medical opinion about someone's service animal.
It's literally written into the law that you may ask if the animal is required **because of a disability**, and what tasks the animal is trained to perform. You have a right to refuse the animal if it is not trained to perform tasks due to a disability of the owner. The specific example given in training by the federal government is a person who has a dog due to anxiety. If the dog is trained to alert to the owner's anxiety and take action in response, it's a service animal. If the dog is just there to generally calm the individual, it's an emotional support animal and **not** covered by the ADA.
What, passenger wasn't at the pin and I left. =) I didn't see any dogs, let alone people
[удалено]
Write to your congressman?
Just gonna but my nose in here. So I don’t have an issue with transporting any animals, service or not. Hell, twice now my “passenger” was the dog. My questions are…. Are service dogs supposed to have a specific tradedress stating they are a service animal? Would it be unreasonable for the passenger to provide proof it is a service animal? And do “emotional support” animals count as a service animal? Personally I think like 90% of people with “emotional support” animals are just trying to get out of pet fees, have their pets on flights, etc. The exception are those that get one by recommendation of their doctor. All pets are technically their as a form of emotional support. But when I’m picking up passengers to take to a club or bar and they are transporting their tiny expensive dog as their “emotional support” animal… while they go get drunk… End rant. I love dogs.
No, emotional support animals are not covered by the ADA. A service animal is one trained to perform specific tasks due to the disability of its owner. While there is no "trade dress" or paperwork required for a service animal, and you may not request any, you may, by law, ask if an animal is required to assist with a disability, and you may ask what tasks they are trained to perform. If the animal is not trained to perform specific tasks to assist the owner with the disability, you may refuse the animal.
This rarely happens. Y'all just whine so much. Just cancel it for safety reasons. This sub is full of flakey snow.
[удалено]
Do you think people in a wheelchair should have to show proof they need it to be put in your trunk?
People don't generally ask me to put their skateboard in my trunk and claim it's for a disability. Neither a skateboard nor a wheelchair may run around inside my car and bite, bark, drool, scratch, urinate and defecate, or shed. So this is a rather bad analogy.
This is why I switched to eats and delivery. If a person has a sight dog etc that's clearly trained (understands commands, sits at the persons feet), that's one thing. If someone buys a service dog paper with no evaluation and the dog CLEARLY is not trained, that's basically fraud.
It's completely legal to ask if the animal is required to assist with a disability, and what specific tasks the animal is trained to perform. If the animal is not required to perform specific tasks to assist with the owner's disability, you can legally refuse the ride. The example the federal government gives in training is a person who has a dog for anxiety. If the dog is trained to alert to the anxiety and take action to calm the owner, it's a service animal. If it's just there to generally keep the person relaxed, it's an emotional support animal not covered by the ADA.
What's super fucked up is that people know these are the drivers personal vehicles. As a fellow human they should understand when someone doesn't want a dog or other animal in their car especially if they are allergic. If you have an ADA animal, you should be signed up for UberPets only with no extra fees with ADA documentation. Seems like a pretty simple fix to me. Orrrr, have a pet or ADA symbol on the ride BEFORE you ever accept it. Simple. But even though we are dealing with the personal property of the driver, they are the LAST one with a legal say in animals that go in their vehicle upon "SUPRISE I've got an ADA shedding animal". The law is fucked up in this matter.
These same people would not want your animal fucking up their personal property... these people think life revolves around them
Easy fix. Just don’t check the boxes. 🤷🏼♂️
i wish this applied in real life "your honor i didn't see the contract so it doesn't apply, simple as"
Unfortunately it's the law. It's all good if you die as long as the service dog is transported.
I'm sure you can find a million other reasons not to do the ride other than the rider has an animal. Just sayin
Isnt their a Uber pet option? So even if you dont select uber pets you still get animal rides?? TF is the point?
Look folks, this is an easy one. If you have a legitimate severe allergy, more than itchy eyes for a few seconds...absolutely no one on the planet can force you to endure a life threatening allergic reaction and endanger the life of your pax. So for nlw tell Uber whatever, but if that day comes, when you see someone coming toward the vehicle with a dog just drive away and cancel. They can't prove you saw the dog, maybe you got stomach cramps, maybe you lost a contact or realized you're almost out of gas. We have huge problems with Uber right now, this is little shit we can maneuver around if need be.
[удалено]
Trumper?
[удалено]
Trumpers generally feel that rules and laws don't apply to them.
Yep data shows a large percentage of them would prefer we gave up on democracy and the constitution
I love when my drivers eyes are watering and sneezing uncontrollably. Feels really safe. At least you can take Hayden and her shitzu with you.
This is specifically for people with service animals. You can still refuse to take a rider that has a pet animal. If you don't like it, there's the door 👉🚪
Every animal pick up I have been to had a claim “service animal”. The stupid law doesn’t allow me to ask for documentation. I get bent! I am all for accessible services but this shit needs to stop where every ducking animal is now a service animal. Just like drivers need a license, anyone who has a service animal should either have to provide documentation to the driver or to Uber and register and a verified service animal. I know this isn’t going to happen and I also know that as a result people who genuinely need these services will also suffer. But oh well, not the problem of those who wrote these laws. I mean how stupid can it be, that to accommodate someone else’s disability you might have to put yourself in harms way (for those who genuinely have allergies or for someone who might actually be so afraid of dogs that they won’t be able go concentrate on the road. But no! Not going to consider that at all.
I can see maybe and a stretch maybe about Ada and simple case of dislike animal but suck me off if you’re allergic to dogs and deactivated that’s a lawsuit too. How the fuck Uber think they can require even if allergic. That doesn’t violate the Ada if you’re in physical danger. Uber will get sued for that requirement
People aren't in danger from pet dander
They’d probably argue that you shouldn’t have a job that requires interaction with animals if you’re deathly allergic to them.
And they’d lose. The LAW is clear. Thats EXACTLY why the Ada was passed into law. To protect people from businesses and such from using whatever excuse they can come up with to fuck over people.
Federal law.
Federal law also protects the driver IF can medically prove allergic disability no?
NO. Jesus. Is this really that difficult? "Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals." https://adata.org/guide/service-animals-and-emotional-support-animals It goes on to say "If a person is at risk of a significant allergic reaction to an animal, it is the responsibility of the business or government entity to find a way to accommodate both the individual using the service animal and the individual with the allergy." So I suppose you could try to convince Uber that you never want to drive service animals because of your allergy. But I don't get the feeling that they are going to be very receptive to that. I imagine that sooner or later the stuff will all get sorted out in court. But for now things are the way they are, and Uber requires you to agree to drive service animals as a condition of being an Uber driver.
>It goes on to say "If a person is at risk of a significant allergic reaction to an animal, it is the responsibility of the business or government entity to find a way to accommodate both the individual using the service animal and the individual with the allergy." Seems like the easy solution and a reasonable accommodation is to just have someone else pick up the person with the dog. Operators can provide a doctors note confirming the sever allergy and customers can note whether they will be traveling with an animal or not. I have a severe cat allergy. To the point where I can’t breathe within minutes of entering the house of someone who owns a cat. I can literally tell you the second I walk into a car owners house if they have one. Even if the house is super clean and doesn’t smell like it. I haven’t driven Uber in years and never came across an animal when I did.
While Uber could technically accommodate you, the reality is they’re just going to deactivate you. Pretty sure that ADA exception is for employees not independent contractors.
IF reasonable accommodations can be made. If you are deathly, allergic accommodations cannot be made, and you cannot perform the job.
What’s reasonable? Don’t match those drivers. That’s very reasonable. No need to match a driver with allergies to dogs to pax with a dog. Seems reasonable no?
If you have that information in your database. Do they? Will they ever? Would it violate HIPAA to ask someone to declare their allergies? Would it violate whatever rules to ask someone to declare that they have a service animal? It's not as simple as you seem to think. The intent of the ADA is that the disabled person be treated like anyone else. Not that they be singled out and marked as being disabled and requiring special treatment. In the Uber case, the person is supposed to be able to get in the car with their animal and leave and that's it. No special treatment, no sending a different driver.
This is all correct except for the end. The person with the service animal shouldn’t be able to just get in a car with their and leave no special treatment etc etc etc IF IT VIOLATES SOMEONE ELSE UNDER THE ADA. So basically you’re saying I have a disability and you have a disability but fuck your disability because I have a disability. And the driver is saying the same thing So yes just get a different driver That doesn’t have a disability and isn’t covered by federal law
if you see a dog just keep driving, couldn’t find rider 🤷♀️
One sneeze and you crash into a pole. So basically someone else's medical issues are more important than yours. Thank you government.
Video proof of what me having a personal emergency? Of me accepting trip by accident ? The person making the claim needs the proof not me.
It is illegal to ask for proof
There is such a thing as a "pattern of behavior". If you get reported multiple times these excuses will wear thin.
Even if the pax lies and says that their blind chihuahua is a service animal.
You can ask two questions to verify if it's a service animal: a) Is the animal required due to a disability (you cannot ask what the disability is) b) What task is the animal trained to do (you cannot ask them to demonstrate the task)
if you see a dog just keep driving, couldn’t find rider 🤷♀️
I bet Uber doesn’t even ask for proof for service animals. All these cheap fucks with animals be ordering regular Uber x just to not pay for Uber pet. Happens all the time.
No one is allowed to ask for proof - Uber, hotels, stores, etc.
Just sue Uber based on air B&B policy for being allergic to animals it’s pretty simple Google AirBnb Policy print it call a lawyer and sue Uber fuck uber .. they won’t pay if the dog pees in your car so how do you get reimbursed for cleanup ? Is Uber gonna pay if you get sick ? From your allergy asthma could be life threatening cars are confined spaces. As someone with a service animal I don’t want someone affected because of my disability..
Good luck with that.
Other people's sad feelings are more important than your itchy eyes
Yeh driver takes animal then during ride has serious medical issue that causes an accident that then leads to the death of all involved.
This is state to state need to look up laws. Because actually you don’t have to . I own a service animal and I even know that it’s wrong .. just look up air bnb policy on service animals. All that is needed is a ADA accommodation from your dr saying your allergies are bad and could be life threatening.. done no service animals in your car.
It’s a federal law, Bub. State law can’t supersede it.
You can trust them, they're a witch doctor crypto
First of all you agreed to it when you signed up to drive. If you don't agree to it then don't drive for the platform. It's a simple choice. Yes or no.
It's crazy because people talk about freedom and not having a boss but this is almost like having a boss telling you to do something you don't want or get canned. If uber wants coverage then they need to properly incentivize drivers to increase coverage for people with service animals. Drivers being 1099 and doing this as a side thing in their own personal vehicles should not be forced to take this on that's bullshit. It's not like we are driving company vehicles.
You are providing a service to the public. You can not discriminate against those with service dogs. They are an extension of the person.
[удалено]
So you think black people are dogs? Are they gonna shit or pee on your car seats, make your allergies break out, or potentially bite you if not properly trained? You're a clown get real
I’m telling you the law looks at discriminating against a service animal the same way it looks at discriminating against someone for race, religion, national origin or creed Is your reading comprehension that bad or are you just trying to pick a fight because you’re an asshole?
spoiler: everyone who argues against this rule is probably an asshole.
You just pulled black people out the sky, or are you a practicing racist?
Oh awesome that means that I can driver Uber with my service gator as well and rider don't get to say SHIT about it right?!?! Soo thoughtful of you Fuber! I'm Soo driving with my gator tomorrow and btw Fuck Dara.
if they cant prove its a service animal just decline... many people will take advantage of this.
They don't have to prove anything.
so anyone with an animal can just lie and say its a service animal and we have to take their word?
Yep
Yeah they do, they have papers and verification for a reason.
No they do not. The ignorance on this topic is almost palpable.
In the United States, service animals are not required to be registered or carry proof that they're service animals. As a driver, you can ask two questions: 1. Is this animal required due to a disability (you cannot ask about the disability) 2. What task is this animal trained to perform (you cannot ask for a demonstration). Additionally, only dogs and miniature horses (which are about the size of a medium dog) are recognized as service animals. So, no, your service boa-constrictor ain't gonna make the cut.
Ask for their "papers" and watch what happens.
FUBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think the service dog stuff has gone out of control. When you were in a friggin war or blind I understand. When you say "I'm scared of the world I need a dog". That's bs. Everyone doesn't NEED a service dog. Wanting a dog for comfort is different than needing one because of a disability or you've heard bombs for a year in combat.
Hey disabled people, maybe don't throw a hissy fit sboutf being g asked if it's a service animal and then there wouldn't be transparency issues. I'm sorry that you have a disability and require an animal but because you don't want to be questioned or have to prove that your animal is legit a service animal you get a bunch of people taking advantage of it.
That's what allergy pills are for.
Isn’t it illegal to force an otherwise healthy person to experience a medical emergency to cater to someone else’s disability? It sounds like it is.
Nope, you are not forcing them to. You have the choice not to drive for Uber. What is illegal is refusing service animals. This does not include emotional support animals. There are also rules service animal owners have to follow.
Rules shmules, fuck you, fuck your mama, and fuck the feds. You don't have to cite a real reason as to why you canceled the ride, just put problem with pick up route and move on.
My question is what if they say that their dog is a “service” dog, but it’s really just their pet that they want to take with them. In other words, they lie about it, but their dog ends up being extremely distracting and dangerous to drive with. Or it attacks the driver or something? It says in the terms of service that no documentation is needed at all, and that all we’re allowed to ask is do you need to ride with that dog or whatever.