[Blindtlk] FW: [berkeley-disabled] Re: Paratransit services and TNCo's, Airports and ADA
Eric Calhoun
eric at pmpmail.com
Mon Sep 22 09:15:17 UTC 2014
This post is quite lengthy, but does NFB of VT know about this? What can
be done to right this wrong?
Original Message:
From: "tea pula.services at gmail.com [berkeley-disabled]"
<berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
To: Berkeley Disability List <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>,
goodgolly at rocketmail.com
Subject: [berkeley-disabled] Re: Paratransit services and TNCo's,
Airports and ADA
Date:
Mon, 22 Sep 2014 03:58:32 -0400
Hi Peers, Don't come to VT. The ADA does not apply and no one enforces
paratransit or other ADA rules on taxis, bus or van co's providing
paratransit to even the one international airport in the whole big
colorful
state. We in power wheelchairs with service dogs are NOT allowed to come
"leaf peep" any longer than 21 days, certainly cannot move (back) here to
live in VT anywhere with paratransit - getting re-certified by either of
several other states' ADA certifications (laminated ID badges showing PWC,
SD, "occasional PCA Yes", one says "gd day/bad day determined by the
client").
The biggest regional transit agency in the state, CCTA, covers the
airport
(and five counties) with only a very few accessible big public busses on
one route during limited hours - not accessible to all, especially since
the drivers can't help with ANY bags even grocery bag sized, never mind
luggage and especially since our power chairs are now often reclining,
leg-lifting, and wider than the old slots were made for manual chair
tie-downs. The only good news is they did just get a first ever tiny TNCo
covering these northern counties, but it is "private" so unregulated,
cannot advertise its numbers at the airport or other public places, so
CCTA
bus co is allowed to continue to deny ADA paratransit to all we dependent
on it who cannot afford the $50/ride (vs. $2.50/ride paratransit fees --
still > bus fare but affordable to most! Unlike taxis or the TNCo's. CCTA
busses from the airport (BTV) go very limited hours, with exactly 1% of
them having a wc-slot big enough for today's long power wheelchairs that
elevate legs. If you need a PCA or fly in during hours that are not
covered by that 1 bus route and it's 1% accessible busses, you need to
write me privately to find the "secret, unpublished numbers and prices" of
the ONLY TNCo new to Chittenden County, because the ONLY
wheelchair-accessible cab co in that biggest, airport-surrounding county
closed down last 4th of July without notice, even after being allowed like
the others in state to charge up to SIXTEEN TIMES HIGHER RATES for a
wheelchair cab than for a regular yellow cab. THey said they were still
not
enough to cover "the insurance and taxi taxes that put them out of
business". The new TNC admits it too refuses to pay the airport taxi tax
of
$500/taxidriver/cab and so, their new 12 accessible vans thus have to
remain "word of mouth only", not even searchable on google or cards given
out by the airport!! Probably not regulated by the DoInsurance or the
AoTransit, who would not tell this or other concerned and questioning
disabled VTers how to get them or find their or any # for WC-accessible
cabs or vans (or housing) that obey the ADA (and FHA).
I researched the ADA's transit requirements when I moved among first 5
counties in CA that all issued photo-id's for van driver identification of
me, my Service Dog and my PWC. Then, in AZ the five year "platinum pass
good on rail, bus, and paratransit vans had no photo, more confidential,
just a computer chip that got me drastically discounted fares on all three
types of transit - wherever I used it; but it could not be renewed without
a face:face re-interview to prove still a resident - they said taxes
subsidize Medicaid rides. I thought we full Medi/Medi duals would get
full
"Home/Community Based Services" of which paratransit is the most
important
for Olmstead independence, of at least some minimum frequency/cost in
every
state. But no, ALL over CA and equally "cost cutting" AZ they
enforced/honored each county's regional transit authorities' paratransit
systems similarly, wherever there are published bus routes.
But in VT - none, all over the entire state - I've researched now all
their
bus co's both big and small: not the big highway-only "commuter routes"
like Greyhound exempt but all smaller published routes also claiming
either
ignorance or exemption from having to accept "out of state prescriptions"
or to even test new residents at all in our out of the 21 days guest
status
that is apparently the only part of the ADA explicitly written so they
have
to do just that minimum for guests?? Not allow residents to move here at
all with HCBServices given to NONE publicly, only by private Nursing Homes
with vans etc. Only D. Ageing Indi. Living Long Term Care does not come
with HCBS or paratransit and even when a resident of Chittenden with four
expiring out of state certifications - no one at all of AHS (being
revamped
due to negligent deaths in both CPS and APS) would replace any
paratransit
ID card:
( CA five cards for 5 years each, last two AZ cards only for two years
each, last 3 not expired til just this year with CCTA still saying no -
making me even more trapped here?! So i am appealing the failure to
recertify in two years to the Human Services Bd and Human Rts Commission,
we'll see if a first ADA case in VT actually occurs). Perhaps one of the
ADA /DREDF lawyers working on this, please come help teach VT that it IS a
FEDERAL law, not state by state optional like Medicaid expansion - they
had
to have (and used to have) enough medicaid et al funding to cover the
existing small number of paratransit vans in each county - better than
NONE. Need to limit the numbers on ADA and LTC another way, not leaving
us
stranded at entry.
I tried for two "fair hearings" on all Medicaid HCBS denials of health
care
and Medicaid rides and Case Management, and they would not even give
paratransit to the fair hearings!!! So both were a joke, held mandatory
"phone only" - no documents or witnesses - or seeing my disabilities,
certifications, service dogs, the ADA written down!!! Only : "we dont
know
how one gets certified an ADA rider" with any of the bus co's - In EBay,
each bus and BART car has to be PWC and SD accessible or a complaint about
it not being so is filed quickly by anyone - where, in court?? Or with an
Agency of Transit? DREDF?? All my medical documentation was totally
ignored or found unacceptable for testing even never mind just honoring
without retesting 'skills' . No reason given other than "out of state";
CCTA and smaller bus/paratransit co's were allowed to simply say NO, we
only give rides to "locally treated members", yet all local doctors of all
sorts were "not taking new (dual chronic care) patients". Perhaps because
I wanted to book rides to see all HUD-national-voucher-accepting housing,
they probably colluded with health care 'providers' to deny a PWC-bound
dual chronic care her more expensive subsidized health care, accessible
housing and transit between them (HCBS) in VT. I'm not the only one, this
is why we cannot live in VT if you cannot drive your own vehicles thru the
snow (PWC to adapted van).
Even the Community Health Center of Burlington is not ADA accessible,
even
after recent new rebuilds - still the dental clinic refused X-rays to me
in
a PWC (mine even has adjustable height but they never even asked me to
roll
under any X-ray machine!) with a service dog warning me that they were
definitely not even attempting to be unscented, and helping me to try to
get to one of their X-ray machines with a hygienist petrified of dogs
leaving the room, no x-rays, no rescheduling and no rides to the next
county over that DOES have an accessible clinic - without paratransit I
was
denied health care in both (therefor) ANY county - and long-term housing
too. All other dental clinics in CCty are private, charge a lot more IF
they take medimedi dual at all.
A local taxi would be $50 each way, unaffordable even locally - and is
supposed to be free (covered by this dual's insurance) to all medically
necessary treatments. I even paid their Intercounty paratransit system
$600
cash to take me to see housing in the beginning, expecting to be
reimbursed
from either Medicaid or "E&D funds", because housing of some sort near
medical treatment is a medical necessity for the medical treatment to
occur! "residents of my area only " most MD's said if taking patients at
all. So at least by the f'hearing - yet NO transit funds or
reimbursements
for anything were even discussed, even at the "hearing" they said we'd
have
to hold "by phone" since I was again trapped & broke. I documented the
five
diseases and two certified Service dogs for TWO WHOLE YEARS I tried to
get
HCBS and HC and especially my paratransit renewed before both other
states'
all expired - failed on all counts! NO enforcement meant I was truly
home-bound, trapped in a home without community or health care. It MUSt be
illegal and the harm was great and still grows as I move out of that state
but my health and housing voucher and records are now even more damaged.
If you really need to fly into tiny BTV in a power WC,
a) be sure your plane is big enough to not squish it into a tiny cargo
hold
(most planes are smaller 'express' size)
- what is this I hear re DoJ ordering all airlines to have some big
planes
with a few WC-slots on board??:)
;
b) call/write me first re that rare TNC co
's unlisted #'s,
or
c)
bring a PCA person who can help you on/off the public busses
during the day.
N
ot even Greyhound go in/out of the airport any more
, the big "commuter busses" don't have to follow same ADA accessibility
rules re paratransit as public daily non-commuter busses do have to, like
fitting and allowing service dogs
).
Only bus 12A, about every hour, from about 7 AM to 5:30 PM. It fits small
PWC's no problem, 2 on each bus up a ramp, carry your own bags. Not too
useful when your flight comes in at 11 PM and you did not know you needed
your own PCA to carry your luggage...to wait all PM long for an accessible
van anywhere. The one and only VCIL has no comment on paratransit in VT,
and offers none to any of its events. So the market is wide open for more
of these private van co's, but I don't think those two national ones are
here yet. Who is it up to in each county or state to assure some
paratransit co provides??
I'm sure the annual national
ADA conference where the DoJ takes these kind of suggestions as you all
post here would be happy to hear from us:
*May 2015 (registration opens 1/15) Call for Presentations Form (pdf)
<http://www.adasymposium.org/2015CallforPresentationsForm.pdf>Atlanta GA
National ADA symposium now accepting presenters. *
Please follow these instructions carefully. You may want to print them
out
to do so. It is your responsibility to make sure your proposal is
submitted
correctly and prior to the deadline of October 10, 2014.
1. VERY IMPORTANT: You must email your submissions to
EdwardsMic at health.missouri.edu or mail them directly to Mike Edwards at:
Great Plains ADA Center, 100 Corporate Lake Drive, Columbia, MO 65203. You
may also fax them to Mike at (573) 884-4925.
Thea w/ Pula Services (still trying to be moved back to an accessible
ground-floor 3-bedroom HUD-leased house anywhere on the NW coast that's
not
smokey? Thanks, miss y'all:)
1bRe: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5687;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZmI5OWhsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2ODcEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 7:51 am (PDT) . Posted by:
>
<accessys at smart.net?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
>
> almost all cabs are owner operators or leased units in a cooperative or
> leasing operation. they pay those costs by the fares they charge.
> having known a few cab drivers they work 12-16 hour days and barely
make
> above minimum wage. the leasing companies that own the permits and cabs
> that are leased make the money no matter weather or not the cab carries
> people.
> but the bottom line is that these "cheap" operations are cutting
corners
> on safety or insurance or training so that they can undercut the legal
> operators.
>
> Bob
>
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Karen Rose rosekm at earthlink.net [berkeley-disabled]
> wrote:
>
> > Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 22:49:17 -0700
> > From: "Karen Rose rosekm at earthlink.net [berkeley-disabled]"
> > <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> > Reply-To: Karen Rose <rosekm at earthlink.net>
> > To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>
> > Cc: Kitty Cone <kitcone at sbcglobal.net>,
>
> 1cRe: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5688;_ylc=X3oDMTJxM2I0aWttBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2ODgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Ruthanne
>
> On 9/7/2014 8:05 PM, accessys at smart.net [berkeley-disabled] wrote:
> > one reason the taxi operators are not taking out the accessible cabs
is
> > that most taxi operators are independent contractors leasing the cabs
> from
> > the companies and the accessible cabs get worse gas mileage than the
non
> -
> accessible ones and the drivers pay for the gas themselves in most
cases.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jen goodgolly at rocketmail.com [berkeley-disabled]
> wrote:
> >
> >> Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 19:23:06 -0700
> >> From: "Jen goodgolly at rocketmail.com [berkeley-disabled]"
> >> <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> >> Reply-To: Jen <goodgolly at rocketmail.com>
> >> To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>,
> >> "berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com serve"
> >> <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
> >>
> >> I do want to make a small point. Taxi's in San Franciscoare
regulated,
> yet by their own admission, they are not sending their accessible cabs
on
> the road, pointing at the TNCs like Uber and Lyft as the reason. They
HAVE
> the accessible cabs, yet they are choosing not to send them out.
Regulation
> has not forced the cab companies to do the right thing. Meanwhile, Uber
and
> Lyft are trying to build their fleet by recruiting drivers that have
> accessible vehicles.
> >> So many people are saying it can't be done. I still believe it can!
As
> a Lyft driver, I see it being possible. I really do!
>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: "SUSAN HENDERSON susan.henderson at mac.com [berkeley-disabled]"
<
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> >> To: "berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com serve" <
> berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>
> >> Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2014 6:55 PM
> >> Subject: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
> >>
> >>
> >> Marilyn Golden, DREDFâ EURO (tm)s ADA transportation policy expert
has this to
> add to the discussion about Uber, Lyft and the other Transportation
Network
> Companies (TNCs):
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd like to voice what may seem to be a counter-intuitive position
on
> Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, and other Transportation Network Companies or
TNCs.
> They may sometimes provide better transportation than taxis, but not
> always! In some cities, TNCs are worse on taking service animals, for
> example, and much worse on refusing to take blind riders and
> mobility-impaired people.
> >>
> >> Also, their proliferation and utmost resistance to any regulation
has
> decimated the taxi industry in some cities, an industry that many
people
> with disabilities across the country depend on. In San Francisco, the
> effects have included a very substantial reduction in the number of
> accessible cabs on the street.
> >>
> >> Some of the companies have paid disability advocates and
> disability-related organizations to promote them. (I am not suggesting
that
> is true of anyone who has defended them on this list)
> >>
> >> I would support these companies a lot more if they would agree to be
> regulated to the same extent as taxis. Such regulations protect the
public,
> including people with disabilities.
> >>
> >> Uber claims it is not covered by the ADA. It is incorrect in that
> claim, but such claims are an example of a resistance to regulation
that
> ultimately hurts everyone.
> >>
> >> And I am not comfortable supporting companies that publicly claim
not
> to be covered by disability rights laws.
> >>
> >> I've read Council member Kriss Worthington's proposal and I think it
is
> very reasonable.
> >>
> >> Marilyn Golden
> >> DREDF
>
> --
> if we have learned one thing from the civil rights movement in the
> united states, it is that when you let others speak for you, you lose.
> ed roberts
>
>
>
>
>
<ruthanne at sonic.net?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> 1d
> Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5689;_ylc=X3oDMTJxM2hkbXZuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2ODkEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 8:42 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Claude Everett"
>
<ceverett at dslextreme.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNC
s>
> Well, let Uber and the other companies pay these fees, it's just a
part
> of
> doing business. This is just an attempt to circumvent city and state
laws
> and regulations for profit.
>
> Regards,
> Claude Everett
> "Every one has a disability, Some, are more aware of it than others."
>
>
> _____
>
> From: berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Karen Rose
> rosekm at earthlink.net [berkeley-disabled]
> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 8:13 PM
> To: SUSAN HENDERSON
> Cc: berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com serve
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> Hi - I am not paid by these organizations - I pay them just as does any
> other writer. For me they have been infinitely faster than taxis and
much
> much cheaper. Two of the major blind organizations are working with
Uber
> and
> Lyft regarding service animal policies. As far as regulation - the
problem
> is that it is not the companies who would be regulated. It is the
> individual
> drivers who would be charged the very high insurance cost currently
paid by
> taxi companies. The individual taxi drivers do not pay this as far as I
> know
> it is their companies who pay this. Also their companies pay the $800
per
> year charged by the city. I do not think that individual drivers could
> afford this cost. Karen
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 7, 2014, at 6:55 PM, "SUSAN HENDERSON susan.henderson at mac.com
> [berkeley-disabled]" <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > Marilyn Golden, DREDF's ADA transportation policy expert has this to
add
> to the discussion about Uber, Lyft and the other Transportation Network
> Companies (TNCs):
> >
> >
> >
> > I'd like to voice what may seem to be a counter-intuitive position on
> Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, and other Transportation Network Companies or TNCs.
> They may sometimes provide better transportation than taxis, but not
> always!
> In some cities, TNCs are worse on taking service animals, for example,
and
> much worse on refusing to take blind riders and mobility-impaired
people.
> >
> > Also, their proliferation and utmost resistance to any regulation has
> decimated the taxi industry in some cities, an industry that many people
> with disabilities across the country depend on. In San Francisco, the
> effects have included a very substantial reduction in the number of
> accessible cabs on the street.
> >
> > Some of the companies have paid disability advocates and
> disability-related organizations to promote them. (I am not suggesting
that
> is true of anyone who has defended them on this list)
> >
> > I would support these companies a lot more if they would agree to be
> regulated to the same extent as taxis. Such regulations protect the
public,
> including people with disabilities.
> >
> > Uber claims it is not covered by the ADA. It is incorrect in that
claim,
> but such claims are an example of a resistance to regulation that
> ultimately
> hurts everyone.
> >
> > And I am not comfortable supporting companies that publicly claim not
to
> be covered by disability rights laws.
> >
> > I've read Council member Kriss Worthington's proposal and I think
> it is
> very reasonable.
> >
> > Marilyn Golden
> > DREDF
> >
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > And I'd like to add that it's a misnomer to refer to these companies
as
> part of a sharing economy or as ride sharing. You request a ride,
receive
> an
> estimate on the cost, accept the price (or not), a car and driver
appear
> and
> take you to your destination and you pay the driver. I'm not sure
what's
> shared in that formula.
> >
> > Susan Henderson
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5691;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZXI0MWg2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTEEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 9:19 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Jen"
>
<goodgolly at rocketmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TN
Cs>
> My experience with Taxi's has not led me to believe that Taxi's are
> committed to true accessibility. Even before the advent of the TNC's
(who
> are getting the blame NOW for a problem that has existed for years!) it
was
> difficult to get an accessible cab. Peter and I traveled once to the
City
> and took a cab to an area that was not well served by cabs. We called
when
> our event was over (5:00 pm)
> for a cab. We even called multiple companies. Either the dispatcher
> laughed at us, or was rude to us, or dismissed us (Cab is on the
way.Click)
> 3 hours later, we still did not have a cab. We ended up calling someone
in
> Berkeley who was able to come out and get us.
> Other times, the driver would refuse to secure Peter's wheelchair.
> Sometimes, the securements were so dirty and stiff, they did not appear
> strong and secure at all! I have witnessed abusive behavior towards us
(for
> having the gall to request an accessible cab) complete with a lecture
> during the ride about how the driver was losing money because of us and
> that we were "lucky" he was even carrying us.
> These conditions were BEFORE Lyft and UberX. It was very convenient
that
> Lyft and Uber came along and gave the cabs a perfect excuse (and it is
an
> excuse!) to leave their accessible cabs in the yard. I understand that
> accessible cabs are more expensive to operate, but I still believe that
> they just found an opportunity to blame TNC's to not do something they
did
> not really want to do anyway. (disclaimer, plenty of taxi drivers are
> wonderful people who provide awesome service)
>
> The difference between accessible cabs and accessible Lyft's is there
> would more than likely be a reason that a Lyft driver would have an
> accessible van. I keep my van clean, and I have a clear motivation to
> ensure that my securement straps are safe and in working order at all
> times. I carry precious cargo in my van. I carry family!!! That
transfers
> when I give rides to others. I always ask how my passenger wants to be
> secured. I ask them if they feel safe with the way I have secured them I
> tug and pull on the securements to make sure they are tight. They are
the
> same securements that are found in accessible cabs and in paratransit
> vehicles. I drive carefully. I am willing to take the extra time to load
> and unload safely. Why? Because it is my car, and I am offering a ride
to
> someone who needs it. I am the face of Lyft. When you ride with me, you
are
> riding with a real, compassionate person who "gets it" You are safe
with
> me. This is a true peer topeer model.
>
> Lyft and Uber should not replace cabs. They should augment cabs. The
more
> options the consumer has, the more reliable the service, especially
when it
> comes to accessibility!
>
> I have just a couple more general comments.
> I have read a lot about Uber and Lyft in the media. From an insider
point
> of view, I can say that a lot of what is published is not true, or is
only
> partially true, or the writer did not completely grasp the subject, but
in
> their eagerness to scoop others, they write the story in a hurry. (Lyft
and
> Uber are hot topics!)
>
> There may or may not be a quote from Uber that says that they believe
they
> are exempt from the ADA, but if it WAS an official stance, I do not
believe
> they believe that anymore.
> Uber would not be the only entity to make the misstep and that said
they
> were exempt. As many advocates in California may remember, the taxis
also
> said they were exempt from the ADA, as have many other entities who
> subsequently found out otherwise. I think early on, the TNC's view was
they
> only connected people who had cars with people who needed rides, and
they
> felt that that was enough.
> Well, regulation HAS spoken, the PUC now defines what a TNC is, how
they
> are insured and operate, and they are REQUIRING these companies to be
> compliant with the ADA.
>
> Lyft has set a minimum requirement for their wheelchair accessible
> vehicles. They can be found here: http://get.lyft.com/access/
> Your vehicle must be equipped with a lift or ramp to accommodate
> passengers traveling in electric or non-electric wheelchairs, must
display
> a placard certifying compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards
> (such as the NMEDA Quality Assurance Program seal), and must have 4
> securement straps and a lap and shoulder belt in proper working
condition
> to secure a passenger traveling in a wheelchair.
>
> I cannot speak for Uber, as I have not yet seen their accessible
vehicle
> requirements.
> I CAN speak for both Lyft and Uber and state again that it is their
policy
> that they will accommodate service animals at all times. Both companies
> have a zero tolerance policy on this and they ask that you contact them
> immediately if you encounter difficulties traveling with a service
animal.
> (There is immediate recourse, as well)
> Lyft's policy is here: https://www.lyft.com/help/article/1590274
>
>
> WHAT ABOUT SERVICE ANIMALS?
>
> Service animals are welcome, no questions asked, and must be
accommodated.
> The American Disabilities Act ensures that community members and their
> service animals have access to the Lyft platform. Drivers who unlawfully
> refuse to transport these working companions will be immediately removed
> from the platform serviced by any public transit.
>
> Uber's policy is more difficult to find. I can find references in blogs
> and driver forums but not their actual policy at the moment, but I do
know
> that they have notified their drivers that they must accept service
animals
> or be removed from the system.
>
> I am quite concerned with the stories that say "I have heard that they
> denied service to a person who is blind or visually impaired" Sadly, I
> believe this has happened on more than one occasion, but I am concerned
> that people believe this happens more than it does. Again, there is
> immediate recourse for a Lyft or Uber passenger who feels this has
> happened. Contact support. They WILL address this. And nothing is more
> powerful than using the service and holding them accountable!
>
> I want to encourage ANYONE with an accessible vehicle, or who
potentially
> needs an accessible vehicle to consider driving for Lyft (or even Uber,
who
> is the competition)
> !
> If you want an accessible vehicle but do not think you can afford one,
> perhaps knowing that you can use your vehicle to generate income by
> carrying not only other people who need accessible vans, but to other
> members of the community that you would never get to meet otherwise. Let
> your vehicle be a blessing to others. Lyft is offering an opportunity
for
> each of us to empower ourselves and others!!!! There are drivers with
> disabilities who drive for Lyft and love it. We are community, and we
> should seize the opportunity to help one another.
>
> Once again, we can show the TNC generation that disability is a natural
> part of the human condition. The TNC's actually need people with
> disabilities. The door of opportunity is open. I urge you to enter it!
>
> Questions? Email me!
>
> Jennifer--in support of an ACCESSIBLE world!
>
> p.s. Lyft has a large community of deaf and hearing impaired drivers!
They
> love driving for Lyft, and the feedback they get from passengers is
> awesome.
> Reply to sender
>
<goodgolly at rocketmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TN
Cs>
> . Reply to group
>
<berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20o
ther%20TNCs>
> . Reply via Web Post
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/messages
/45691;_ylc=X3oDMTJxaWZwNWxrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3
MDUwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTEEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw--
?act=reply&messageNum=45691>
> . All Messages (19)
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5675;_ylc=X3oDMTM2NzE5N3RlBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTEEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2NwR0cG
NJZAM0NTY3NQ-->
> . Top ^ <#14856bb0dd219207_toc>
> 1f Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5692;_ylc=X3oDMTJxYnFzcmFxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTIEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 9:48 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Jen"
>
<goodgolly at rocketmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TN
Cs>
> A goal to strive for!
> Why not reach for that here? Accessibility as the norm, not the
exception!
> And the more demand there is for accessible vehicles, eventually, the
> price for accessible vehicles will go down. (Yes, I am an optimist!)
>
> Jennifer
>
> ________________________________
> From: "accessys at smart.net [berkeley-disabled]" <
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>
> Cc: Kitty Cone <kitcone at sbcglobal.net>;
"berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com"
> <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>; Karen Rose <rosekm at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 7:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
>
> London has for some years required ALL cabs to be accessible
>
> want a shield. will only go on an accessible vehicle.
> most places have an age limit for cabs so fairly quick turnover
>
> Bob
> Reply to sender
>
<goodgolly at rocketmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TN
Cs>
> . Reply to group
>
<berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20o
ther%20TNCs>
> . Reply via Web Post
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/messages
/45692;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdHNxZm9qBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3
MDUwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTIEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw--
?act=reply&messageNum=45692>
> . All Messages (19)
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5675;_ylc=X3oDMTM2YnBzdnNvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTIEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2NwR0cG
NJZAM0NTY3NQ-->
> . Top ^ <#14856bb0dd219207_toc>
> 1g Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5693;_ylc=X3oDMTJxOTdmcmQ0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTMEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 11:02 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Ingrid Tischer"
>
<ivtischer at msn.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> I'm physically able to take advantage of Uber and Lyft, and struggled
> with SF taxi shortcomings for 10+ years (to get to/from work, mostly)
but I
> don't support these new companies' attempt to avoid responsible
business
> practices.
>
> Equitable regulation is how pwd have gained transportation access.
Handing
> over money for a service rendered simply cannot be framed as "sharing."
> These companies are duping the public with the term "sharing economy"
> simply to avoid accepting the responsibilities and costs of doing
business.
> If I adopted the same standard, my job would be part of the sharing
economy
> because I share my time. As for workers who provide the tools and
premises
> for providing their services, and who set their own hours, there is
already
> a term for them: independent contractors. Who are, in fact, part of the
> non-sharing economy. Just like taxi drivers.
>
> As another poster stated, Uber and Lyft simply pass their costs on to
> others, e.g., the driver through insurance costs and the rider through
risk
> if there is an accident. Both are unacceptable and conveniently result
in
> only the companies benefiting.
>
> As much as I want a solution to the ongoing lack of accessible
> transportation, I can't get behind these companies.
>
> Ingrid Tischer
>
> To: accessys at smart.net; susan.henderson at mac.com
> CC: kitcone at sbcglobal.net; berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com;
> rosekm at earthlink.net
> From: berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 09:48:38 -0700
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> A goal to strive for!Why not reach for that here? Accessibility as the
> norm, not the exception! And the more demand there is for accessible
> vehicles, eventually, the price for accessible vehicles will go down.
(Yes,
> I am an optimist!)
> Jennifer
>
> From: "accessys at smart.net [berkeley-disabled]" <
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>
> Cc: Kitty Cone <kitcone at sbcglobal.net>;
"berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com
> "
> <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>; Karen Rose <rosekm at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 7:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> London has for some years required ALL cabs to be accessiblewant a
shield.
> will only go on an accessible vehicle.most places have an age limit for
> cabs so fairly quick turnoverBob
>
>
> Reply to sender
>
<ivtischer at msn.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> . Reply to group
>
<berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20o
ther%20TNCs>
> . Reply via Web Post
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/messages
/45693;_ylc=X3oDMTJxbDgwZmVhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3
MDUwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTMEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw--
?act=reply&messageNum=45693>
> . All Messages (19)
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5675;_ylc=X3oDMTM2b2ZzcjU5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTMEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2NwR0cG
NJZAM0NTY3NQ-->
> . Top ^ <#14856bb0dd219207_toc>
> 1h Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5695;_ylc=X3oDMTJxOXBhNHIwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTUEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 11:59 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Karen Rose"
>
<rosekm at earthlink.net?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> When I have used these companies I have felt like they were a part
of
> the sharing economy â EURO " I have felt like I have handled the
convenience of
> owning a car without being permitted to own one myself. I can get rapid
> transportation to and from work when
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:02 AM, "Ingrid Tischer ivtischer at msn.com
> [berkeley-disabled]" <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm physically able to take advantage of Uber and Lyft, and struggled
> with SF taxi shortcomings for 10+ years (to get to/from work, mostly)
but I
> don't support these new companies' attempt to avoid responsible
business
> practices.
> >
> > Equitable regulation is how pwd have gained transportation access.
> Handing over money for a service rendered simply cannot be framed as
> "sharing." These companies are duping the public with the term "sharing
> economy" simply to avoid accepting the responsibilities and costs of
doing
> business. If I adopted the same standard, my job would be part of the
> sharing economy because I share my time. As for workers who provide the
> tools and premises for providing their services, and who set their own
> hours, there is already a term for them: independent contractors. Who
are,
> in fact, part of the non-sharing economy. Just like taxi drivers.
> >
> > As another poster stated, Uber and Lyft simply pass their costs on to
> others, e.g., the driver through insurance costs and the rider through
risk
> if there is an accident. Both are unacceptable and conveniently result
in
> only the companies benefiting.
> >
> > As much as I want a solution to the ongoing lack of accessible
> transportation, I can't get behind these companies.
> >
> > Ingrid Tischer
> >
> > To: accessys at smart.net; susan.henderson at mac.com
> > CC: kitcone at sbcglobal.net; berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com;
> rosekm at earthlink.net
> > From: berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 09:48:38 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
> >
> >
> 1iRe: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5696;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZnNpYjVlBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 12:03 pm (PDT) . Posted by: "Dona Mcnula"
donamcnula
>
<donamcnula at yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> Has anyone of this list read the access plans filed by these
> services?-Dona
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Ingrid Tischer ivtischer at msn.com [berkeley-disabled]" <
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> To: Jen <goodgolly at rocketmail.com>; "berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com"
<
> berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 11:02 AM
> Subject: RE: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
>
> I'm physically able to take advantage of Uber and Lyft, and struggled
with
> SF taxi shortcomings for 10+ years (to get to/from work, mostly) but I
> don't support these new companies' attempt to avoid responsible business
> practices.
>
> Equitable regulation is how pwd have gained transportation access.
Handing
> over money for a service rendered simply cannot be framed as "sharing."
> These companies are duping the public with the term "sharing economy"
> simply to avoid accepting the responsibilities and costs of doing
business.
> If I adopted the same standard, my job would be part of the sharing
economy
> because I share my time. As for workers who provide the tools and
premises
> for providing their services, and who set their own hours, there is
already
> a term for them: independent contractors. Who are, in fact, part of the
> non-sharing economy. Just like taxi drivers.
>
> As another poster stated, Uber and Lyft simply pass their costs on to
> others, e.g., the driver through insurance costs and the rider through
risk
> if there is an accident. Both are unacceptable and conveniently result
in
> only the companies benefiting.
>
> As much as I want a solution to the ongoing lack of accessible
> transportation, I can't get behind these companies.
>
> Ingrid Tischer
>
> ________________________________
> To: accessys at smart.net; susan.henderson at mac.com
> CC: kitcone at sbcglobal.net; berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com;
> rosekm at earthlink.net
> From: berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 09:48:38 -0700
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> A goal to strive for!
> Why not reach for that here? Accessibility as the norm, not the
exception!
> And the more demand there is for accessible vehicles, eventually, the
> price for accessible vehicles will go down. (Yes, I am an optimist!)
>
> Jennifer
>
> ________________________________
> From: "accessys at smart.net [berkeley-disabled]" <
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>
> Cc: Kitty Cone <kitcone at sbcglobal.net>;
"berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com"
> <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>; Karen Rose <rosekm at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 7:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
>
> London has for some years required ALL cabs to be accessible
>
> want a shield. will only go on an accessible vehicle.
> most places have an age limit for cabs so fairly quick turnover
>
> Bob
>
> Reply to sender
>
<donamcnula at yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> . Reply to group
>
<berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20o
ther%20TNCs>
> . Reply via Web Post
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/messages
/45696;_ylc=X3oDMTJxYWR1bjZmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3
MDUwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw--
?act=reply&messageNum=45696>
> . All Messages (19)
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5675;_ylc=X3oDMTM2a2JpdXRmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2NwR0cG
NJZAM0NTY3NQ-->
> . Top ^ <#14856bb0dd219207_toc>
> 1j Re: More on Uber and other TNCs
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5698;_ylc=X3oDMTJxaWlyNHJtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 12:11 pm (PDT) . Posted by: "Karen Rose"
>
<rosekm at earthlink.net?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> If the companies would pay these fees and these insurance costs them
> this could work. But I do not believe that individual drivers â EURO "
many of
> whom are only working part time â EURO " could possibly afford this.
Karen
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:43 AM, "'Claude Everett' ceverett at dslextreme.com
> [berkeley-disabled]" <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well, let Uber and the other companies pay these fees, it's just a
part
> of doing business. This is just an attempt to circumvent city and state
> laws and regulations for profit.
> > Regards,
> > Claude Everett
> > "Every one has a disability, Some, are more aware of it than others."
> >
> >
> > From: berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Karen Rose
> rosekm at earthlink.net [berkeley-disabled]
> > Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 8:13 PM
> > To: SUSAN HENDERSON
> > Cc: berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com serve
> > Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
> >
> >
> > Hi â EURO " I am not paid by these organizations â EURO " I pay them
just as does
> any other writer. For me they have been infinitely faster than taxis
and
> much much cheaper. Two of the major blind organizations are working
with
> Uber and Lyft regarding service animal policies. As far as regulation â
EURO "
> the problem is that it is not the companies who would be regulated. It
is
> the individual drivers who would be charged the very high insurance
cost
> currently paid by taxi companies. The individual taxi drivers do not
pay
> this as far as I know it is their companies who pay this. Also their
> companies pay the $800 per year charged by the city. I do not think
that
> individual drivers could afford this cost. Karen
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Sep 7, 2014, at 6:55 PM, "SUSAN HENDERSON
susan.henderson at mac.com
> [berkeley-disabled]" <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Marilyn Golden, DREDFâ EURO (tm)s ADA transportation policy expert
has this to
> add to the discussion about Uber, Lyft and the other Transportation
Network
> Companies (TNCs):
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd like to voice what may seem to be a counter-intuitive position
on
> Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, and other Transportation Network Companies or
TNCs.
> They may sometimes provide better transportation than taxis, but not
> always! In some cities, TNCs are worse on taking service animals, for
> example, and much worse on refusing to take blind riders and
> mobility-impaired people.
> > >
> > > Also, their proliferation and utmost resistance to any regulation
has
> decimated the taxi industry in some cities, an industry that many
people
> with disabilities across the country depend on. In San Francisco, the
> effects have included a very substantial reduction in the number of
> accessible cabs on the street.
> > >
> > > Some of the companies have paid disability advocates and
> disability-related organizations to promote them. (I am not suggesting
that
> is true of anyone who has defended them on this list)
> > >
> > > I would support these companies a lot more if they would agree to
be
> regulated to the same extent as taxis. Such regulations protect the
public,
> including people with disabilities.
> > >
> > > Uber claims it is not covered by the ADA. It is incorrect in that
> claim, but such claims are an example of a resistance to regulation that
> ultimately hurts everyone.
> > >
> > > And I am not comfortable supporting companies that publicly claim
not
> to be covered by disability rights laws.
> > >
> > > I've read Council member Kriss Worthington's proposal and I
think
> it is very reasonable.
> > >
> > > Marilyn Golden
> > > DREDF
> > >
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > > And Iâ EURO (tm)d like to add that itâ EURO (tm)s a misnomer to
refer to these
> companies as part of a sharing economy or as ride sharing. You request
a
> ride, receive an estimate on the cost, accept the price (or not), a car
and
> driver appear and take you to your destination and you pay the driver.
> Iâ EURO (tm)m not sure whatâ EURO (tm)s shared in that formula.
> > >
> > > Susan Henderson
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> Mon Sep 8, 2014 12:12 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
>
>
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/berkeley-disabled/conversations/topics/4
5699;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdW51cnQ1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIyODE1MwRncnBzcElkAzE3MD
UwMTM0ODEEbXNnSWQDNDU2OTkEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDIwNDM2Nw-->
> "Ingrid Tischer"
>
<ivtischer at msn.com?subject=Re%3A%20More%20on%20Uber%20and%20other%20TNCs>
> Karen, I respect your need and that you use them, same as I respect
the
> individual drivers. I consider this a systems-level problem that should
be
> addressed at the industry level.
>
> Many cab drivers own their vehicles, as Uber and Lyft drivers do; in a
> sense, they "share" them with other drivers, if I use your reasoning.
And
> many times I myself answered friends' question, "Hey, you take so many
> cabs, why don't you just buy a car?" with, "Because it's like I have the
> convenience of owning a car even though I can't drive."
>
> The primary operations distinction between conventional cab companies
and
> Uber/Lyft is that the former still relies on a central dispatch while
the
> latter relies on a decentralized mobile platform. A price is charged
and
> money changes hands. That's a business.
>
> Ingrid Tischer
>
> CC: goodgolly at rocketmail.com; berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com
> To: ivtischer at msn.com
> From: berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 11:59:53 -0700
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> When I have used these companies I have felt like they were a part of
the
> sharing economy - I have felt like I have handled the convenience of
owning
> a car without being permitted to own one myself. I can get rapid
> transportation to and from work when
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:02 AM, "Ingrid Tischer ivtischer at msn.com
> [berkeley-disabled]" <berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> I'm physically able to take advantage of Uber and Lyft, and struggled
with
> SF taxi shortcomings for 10+ years (to get to/from work, mostly) but I
> don't support these new companies' attempt to avoid responsible business
> practices.
>
> Equitable regulation is how pwd have gained transportation access.
Handing
> over money for a service rendered simply cannot be framed as "sharing."
> These companies are duping the public with the term "sharing economy"
> simply to avoid accepting the responsibilities and costs of doing
business.
> If I adopted the same standard, my job would be part of the sharing
economy
> because I share my time. As for workers who provide the tools and
premises
> for providing their services, and who set their own hours, there is
already
> a term for them: independent contractors. Who are, in fact, part of the
> non-sharing economy. Just like taxi drivers.
>
> As another poster stated, Uber and Lyft simply pass their costs on to
> others, e.g., the driver through insurance costs and the rider through
risk
> if there is an accident. Both are unacceptable and conveniently result
in
> only the companies benefiting.
>
> As much as I want a solution to the ongoing lack of accessible
> transportation, I can't get behind these companies.
>
> Ingrid Tischer
>
> To: accessys at smart.net; susan.henderson at mac.com
> CC: kitcone at sbcglobal.net; berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com;
> rosekm at earthlink.net
> From: berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 09:48:38 -0700
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> A goal to strive for!Why not reach for that here? Accessibility as the
> norm, not the exception! And the more demand there is for accessible
> vehicles, eventually, the price for accessible vehicles will go down.
(Yes,
> I am an optimist!)
> Jennifer
>
> From: "accessys at smart.net [berkeley-disabled]" <
> berkeley-disabled-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
> To: SUSAN HENDERSON <susan.henderson at mac.com>
> Cc: Kitty Cone <kitcone at sbcglobal.net>;
"berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com
> "
> <berkeley-disabled at yahoogroups.com>; Karen Rose <rosekm at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 7:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [berkeley-disabled] More on Uber and other TNCs
>
> London has for some years required ALL cabs to be accessiblewant a
shield.
> will only go on an accessible vehicle.most places have an age limit for
> cabs so fairly quick turnoverBob
>
>
>
>
> >> > I am alarmed to hear any discussion about the concept of
having
> photos > or other personal ID on placards. The number can be checked;
> that's why > it's there. It's nobody's business but the healthcare
> people, the DMV, > and the cops to question. We're on a slippery slope
if
> we allow others
>
> to decide that we should or should not have access to placards.
> >>> > Just a couple weeks ago I had to have a temporary operation
>
> "
> 1/2 page
> "
> in my car window for a couple days, and it included my name and
> address. That was outrageous. I felt completely vulnerable, especially
as
> someone> already dealing with two cases of ID theft in our household.
It
> is> stupid in this day and age where ID theft is common.
> >>> > But as a woman, this put me at another level of danger and
> >>> > vulnerability. We must not have photos or addresses or other
> personal info on placards. But this also would put drivers of disabled
at
> >>> > tremendous risk of harassment. I have been one of those drivers
> prior to having my own placard. With cards with photos and other
personal
> info > someone well-meaning or just rude would be "welcome" to accuse
me
> and> even welcomed to come up to the car with my family or the others
> person in it, or not, to look at the card. Creepy. It would be like a
> welcome mat to vigilantes.
> >>> >
> >>> > I already face lots of hostile and accusing looks as a user who
has
> a "hidden" disability. Is it my duty to explain myself to those who
> may have no concern about my disability? If asked by a cop for ID,
etc., I
> >>> > would simply pull out the DMV paper we are required to keep with
us
> for
> >>> > that purpose if we have placards. Should I pull it out for anyone
on
> the
> >>> > street?
> >>> >
> >>> > I am very open about talking about this disability, MCS, Multiple
> >>> > Chemical Sensitivity, but that's when I am up for it, which is not
> every
> >>> > time others look like they have daggers shooting out of their
eyes
> at> me.
> >>> > It is interesting to hear outcry about misuse of placards coming
> from many non-users who feel so "cheated" when people with placards do
not>
> pay. Anyone who feels like it's better to pay is welcome to do so. No
one
> is stopping them. Someone I know was talking about loving all her>
taxes in
> Albany. I pointed out that not everyone could afford them, and> know
> someone (disabled) who lost her home in Berkeley due to the taxes
> >>> > that kept rising dramatically. This Albany woman has a very nice
> salary and good benefits. I suggested that she could donate more money
on
> her own, without it coming via a tax, and she said that she'd never do
> it that way. I bring this up because it is the kind of thinking we all
> >>> > might want to remember, that anyone can find ways and places to
> lives in poverty, but many of us do, specifically because of
limitations
> >>> > imposed by disability, in the case of MCS locking many of us out
of
>
> being in many workplaces, and many of us with MCS suffer other
> >>> > sensitivities such as electrical or wifi or mold, as well as
chronic
> >>> > fatigue. We get limited left, right, and center. Regardless
money,
> >>> > unless we are very wealthy, which is what it takes to buy a house
in
> the
> >>> > Bay Area, we have the problem of laundry, and some cannot just
grab
> an
> >>> > apartment anywhere even if they can afford the common rent now.
> People
> >>> > who own homes lose their homes due to neighbors refusing to stop
> using
> >>> > fragranced laundry products. I could continue with a "laundry
list"
> of considerations which use up a lot of our lives. My point is, within
> our "ranks" disabled people need to realize the myriad and increasing
> >>> > disabilities in our society, beyond mobility-restricting
> disabilities.
> >>> > How do we get "the general public" to understand that there
simply
> are more disabilities now than even 30 years ago and more disabled
> spaces are needed, not harassment lobbed at users of placards? I will
never
> >>> > assume that a person using a placard is using it wrongly. When I
am
> not
> >>> > in a situation of a toxic exposure pulling me down, I look most
> people's
> >>> > idea of healthy and using the spaces in parking lots often keeps
me
> from
> >>> > exposures, or from more likelihood of bad exposures. I plan most
of
> my
> >>> > "moves" on the street quietly, without others even realizing the
> >>> > triangulations I'm doing to place myself in the safest place while
on
> >>> > the street on foot, or in terms of where I park, or move.
> >>> >
> >>> > I want to see everyone with MCS, or any disability, who can be
out
> and about rather than only at home, out there. Humans are social
> creatures and we want to be out of buildings sometimes, and we need
some sun
> >>> > directly on our skin for health. Many of us need to spend some
time
> out and about, even though we pay for it later. 3 weeks after returning
> from a trip which really ripped my system, I have been home almost
> >>> > continuously since then, unable to do basically anything other
than
> >>> > cooking and laundry. I got a cold over 4 weeks ago that has
further
> kept
> >>> > me down. Based on past experience, it will probably be another
week
> or
> >>> > more before I can do more than mostly sit or lie down, and before
I
> have
> >>> > much brain power. This is the longest thing I've been able to
write
> for
> >>> > a month. For me, that's completely limiting.
> >>> >
> >>> > All of this arises for me out of the placards issue. Paying for
> parking
> >>> > already is an issue of contention for me, and while we are told
that
> >>> > merchants want limited parking, I have heard many merchants
complain.
> >>> > The extra stress people have about possible parking tickets
results
> in
> >>> > people not ambling along in business areas in a relaxed way,
which
> can
> >>> > result in people giving business to other businesses than the one
> which
> >>> > triggered the original stop. But the larger issue is that of it
> being a
> >>> > regressive tax; people with plenty of money have no problem with
the
> >>> > payments and don't have the concern about tickets, just accepting
> that
> >>> > they will pay for many tickets every month (this was common when
I
> lived
> >>> > in SF in the late 80's; people with leeway just left their cars
> knowing
> >>> > they'd get a ticket, and assumed a certain lot of tickets per
month).
> >>> > long wait at some bathroom. This punitive action does not serve
our
> >>> > society. Maybe their wheelchair malfunctioned and they were
literally
> >>> > stuck in place. All the more reason for disabled people to loudly
> object
> >>> > to any changes to placard use other than demanding more spaces on
> public
> >>> > streets, and those of us who do not always need the actual
spaces,
> >>> > depending on the physical situation, still often need the free
> parking.
> >>> > That has helped to level a playing field for many of us with MCS,
> >>> > allowing us to enjoy the benefits of being out and among people in
> >>> > business areas.
> >>> >
> >>> > Max
>
Thea Pula.Services at gmail.com
------------------------------------------
*Unscented Service Dogs smell better than others!! 1:1 Services provided
willingly by talented Animals. PS assists with accessibility for
functional
teams. Equal Access for ALL Species to their Ecosystems...the ADA
governs USA access. *
*"Lead Pula the Rain Animal monsoon **mare across the dry savannas." -San
saying; Pula = Life, Rain*
*"The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are
treated." - Mahatma GandhiPlease consider the Environment before printing
things or eating Animals. *
*LEGAL NOTIFICATION: **RESPECT CONFIDENTIALITY: Do not forward or repeat
any contents without permission from original sender. *This email,
together
with any attachments, contains confidential and privileged material
intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) addressed by Pula
Services' affiliates. Any unauthorized review, distribution, storage or
harm to the original Pula Services sender is strictly prohibited.* NO
COMMERCIAL CALLS, emails or # storage. *
More information about the BlindTlk
mailing list