<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Greetings!</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I'm on the NAGDU list, so I've read Al Elia's message below and a
good many others. I haven't flown since 2005, mostly because my
ears and planes hate each other, but these seemingly eternal guide
dog hassles make me not want to fly even if the cabin pressure is
perfect. I don't yet know how to call for an Uber or Lyft driver,
and right now I hope I never need to do it. That said, from what
I've read and heard, I believe that Al and the other leaders
involved are doing the very best they can to deal with this
abysmal business. Since I am sometimes quite critical of our
outfit, I feel especially driven to say so when I think we're
getting it right as well as we can.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Best!</p>
<p>Al</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/7/23 14:19, Justin Heard via
Massachusetts-NFB wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:822f05ef-ebbb-c6dc-a460-7614a9063ebb@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>Good afternoon everyone. <br>
</p>
<p>During yesterday's general session, Uber did not have much to
offer us. However, I learned today that NAGDU has been doing
some important work with airlines and Uber. Here is an
insightful email sent by a member of the NAGDU executive board.
If you are interested in more information, please subscribe to
the nagdu email list. <br>
</p>
<p>I am sharing this because I never would have known about
NAGDU's efforts if not for the email. I believe others also may
not have any information, and may feel frustrated about our lack
of progress with Uber and the airlines. We are making strides,
but quietly. Perhaps too quietly. <br>
</p>
<p>I hope you find this helpful. <br>
</p>
<p>-------- Forwarded Message --------</p>
<div class="moz-forward-container">
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" cellspacing="0"
cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [NAGDU] My Thoughts on the NAGDU Seminar</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Date:
</th>
<td>Sun, 02 Jul 2023 22:17:26 -0500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">From:
</th>
<td>Al Elia via NAGDU <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:nagdu@nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true"><nagdu@nfbnet.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Reply-To:
</th>
<td>NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide
Dog Users <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:nagdu@nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true"><nagdu@nfbnet.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">To: </th>
<td>NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide
Dog Users <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:nagdu@nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true"><nagdu@nfbnet.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">CC: </th>
<td>Al Elia <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:al.elia@aol.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><al.elia@aol.com></a>,
NAGDU <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:board@nagdu.org" moz-do-not-send="true"><board@nagdu.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
Mike and all, On behalf of myself and the NAGDU executive board:<br>
<br>
Regarding the ACAA: We are hopeful that the pilot program that
was included in the draft FAA reauthorization will pass. That is
the best chance for something to happen soon, meaning in less
than two to three years. We sought statutory provisions to
prohibit forms entirely, but that was rejected on a partisan
basis. We sought a statutory restriction that the forms could
not be required before boarding and that airlines needed to
provide both the forms and assistance completing them, but that
was similarly rejected on a partisan basis. We also sought a
private right of action to sue in the FAA reauthorization, but
that was similarly rejected on a partisan basis. I should add
that when I say "a partisan basis," I mean that one party told
us that they would not agree to anything that the airline lobby
opposed. The pilot program was the best we could do, so we did
it.<br>
<br>
We are also drafting a petition for a new rulemaking regarding
service animals on airlines that we plan to submit to the DOT
before the end of the summer. We could petition for things to go
back to pre-2021 rules, but we have been told that such a
petition will be rejected. We plan to propose that if an airline
requires attestation forms, they must provide assistance
completing them. That means that they must assist completing
them at the airport at the gate and at no earlier time, or that
if they require them in advance of travel, they must assist in
completing the forms over the phone. That new rulemaking will
take two to three years. The airlines will oppose it. We should
protest when they do.<br>
<br>
There are two possible ways to address the forms discrimination
issue in a shorter period of time. One is to pursue an APA
action to set aside the current regulations as unlawful. I have
been told by the NFB's general counsel that the likelihood of
success with an APA action is low, and the risk of losing is
that our rights could be rolled back further if a court holds
that requiring forms from guide dog users is lawful. That said,
we are still considering filing such an action, with the
requirement that if, after reviewing the administrative record
NFB believes we are likely to lose, we will seek dismissal of
the action in order to avoid making bad law. If it looks like we
might win, we should mobilize guide dog users to show up at the
court house.<br>
<br>
The second option is something that we will be attempting by the
fall, as it has no risk but may not succeed. I have discussed it
with the board and with NFB, and we are agreed that we should
try it. However, we are not discussing it openly because we do
not want the airlines or others to have advance warning of our
plans, as they would then have an opportunity to prepare to
thwart our efforts. Again we should plan a march in support once
we have pulled the trigger on this.<br>
<br>
We have discussed a more immediate protest at the DOT. We and
NFB are not opposed to such a protest. However, we will need
enough folks with guide dogs to attend such a protest to make it
worth everyone's time and effort, and to ensure that it may be
effective.. Unlike other protests where the NFB can easily
mobilize lots of blind protesters, we feel it would be important
for the bulk of the protesters to be guide dog users. That is
harder to mobilize just based on membership numbers. If there is
support for such a protest at the business meeting, we will work
with NFB's advocacy team to move forward on that. We still may
hold off until we have a petition filed for a new rulemaking, as
a protest in support of something we just filed is more likely
to be helpful in making change than a protest just because we
don't like what is happening now.<br>
<br>
We have also been coordinating our advocacy efforts with GDUI,
the ACB's guide dog division, as our interests are aligned on
this issue. We may be able to work with them on a joint protest
in order to boost numbers.<br>
<br>
One concern that we must think about is the public reaction to
such a protest. It is one thing to protest to demand access to
public buildings, jobs, accommodations, etc. However, the public
may feel that filling out forms to bring your dog somewhere is
no big deal, especially if it keeps others from bringing their
fake service animals places and bothering all of the
non-disabled people. The airlines and media did a great job
publicizing the few instances of fake service animals and ESAs
causing mayhem. We will have a very uphill battle if we want to
try to re-cork that bottle. I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but
we should consider the possible public backlash.<br>
<br>
We all know that guide dogs are not the problem, and that people
aren't faking blindness and falsely claiming their pet is a
guide dog. They are falsely claiming an invisible disability and
a need for a fake service animal for that disability. However,
agencies are loathe to apply different rules to guide dogs than
to service animals for other disabilities. In addition, advocacy
organizations for other disabilities have opposed and will
oppose any differentiation between guide dogs and other types of
service animals.<br>
<br>
As an aside, I would like to point out that we are now facing
similar treatment as non-blind service animal users have always
faced when flying. In other areas of life we frequently still
maintain a privileged position relative to other service animal
users. We may wish to consider that before insisting on a return
to the status quo ante. We are no longer the only (or at least
near only) users of service animals, as we used to be. That is
largely why we are dealing with these new impositions. We may
want to consider accepting this new world, and only requiring
accommodations rather than our previously privileged status.<br>
<br>
That said, I have always represented the interests of guide dog
users specifically, and will continue to do so. Where there is a
conflict between our interests and the interests of non-blind
service animal users, I will pursue our interests. Where I can
find common ground on an intersectional basis, I will pursue
that with a "rising tides lift all boats" mindset.<br>
<br>
Regarding JetBlue: I think that, given the multiple denials of
different members by JetBlue, we should consider a protest at
their headquarters in Long Island City, NY. Again we need
numbers. I would welcome your and any others' assistance with
organizing.<br>
<br>
Regarding the pilot: It will be open to everyone, regardless of
how frequently they travel. It will be open to everyone,
regardless of their facility with technology. Airlines will have
to take a service animal number by phone just as they take a
pre-check number by phone. As for your comment that " it still
leaves the door open for discrimination at the airport," I don't
understand. airlines were always able to discriminate without
facing consequences, even pre-2021. I used to avoid flying
Southwest because I faced discrimination nearly every time I
flew them pre-2021 when staff required me to sit in the bulkhead
even if I didn't want to. I was threatened with being removed
from the aircraft if I didn't move. MY complaints to DOT went
nowhere. Again, the pilot is an improvement, not a cure-all.<br>
<br>
As for your belief that we may be able to find enough republican
support for a bill that provides for a cause of action to sue
airlines, I respectfully disagree. As I mentioned above, one
party has essentially outsourced decision-making on their
support to the airlines. If you know of members who would buck
their party on this, please connect John PAre, Justin Young, and
me with their offices and we will happily make that a priority.
However, we are all volunteers here, and our time is valuable.
We do not want the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Right
now we are facing bad to very bad. Good would be better. We can
achieve good. Once we achieve good, we may pursue perfect.
However, if perfect is unattainable, as seems certain given
partisan efforts to strip causes of action from the ADA,
partisan rhetoric about the negative effects of ADA lawsuits on
businesses, partisan outsourcing to the airlines, and the
information we have gleaned from hill staffers regarding
partisan attitudes, we have chosen to seek the good. We do not
want to spend our time fruitlessly tilting at a perfect windmill
when we can successfully achieve good and make our lives better
than they are now. That is true even if making our lives better
still falls short of being as good as the past.<br>
<br>
As for Uber: We are never going to get all drivers to stop
denying us, just as we never got all taxis to stop denying us.
All we can do is make it so that when a driver denies us, they
are not permitted to continue driving for paying passengers.
Over time, the result will be that long-time drivers will be the
drivers who take their obligations seriously and don't deny us,
and newer drivers who get the message that denying
service-animal users is not tolerated and will be swiftly
punished. Uber has raised the priority of service-animal denial
complaints to the highest level, which is the same level as
investigations of sexual and physical assault complaints. We
have been told that Uber is now requiring evidence that a driver
did not deny based on a service animal when a complaint is made.
As for past denials, We were also told that even when we
received emails saying that a driver was educated, those drivers
were also removed from Uber's platform. We continue to push Uber
to provide us with outcome determinations after investigations
of service animal denials, as we have gotten from Lyft.<br>
<br>
The Self-ID pilot will automatically suspend drivers when they
deny based on a service animal. That is not nothing. Right now
drivers are only suspended pending an investigation when a
complaint is lodged by a rider. That often doesn't happen
because lodging a complaint is difficult and time-consuming. We
have tried to address that difficulty as well, and as a result
of our efforts Uber implemented a change to require their trust
and safety hotline to accept complaints about service animal
denials. However, that is still frustrating and time-consuming,
especially when multiple drivers deny. The automated system will
immediately suspend in the moment of the denial without the
rider having to take any action. That should help eliminate
denying drivers from the platform over time in a much more
efficient manner than the current system provides. We can't stop
drivers from betting that they aren't likely to be faced with
transporting a service animal in their car, and refusing to do
so when they lose that bet. What we can do is make it so that
the consequences of refusing are immediate and serious. The Self
-ID system I proposed and Uber agreed to pilot does that.<br>
<br>
We are also encouraging riders to file DOJ complaints because
our attorneys have said that DOJ is actively investigating such
complaints. a DOJ investigation is far more concerning to Uber
than a potential lawsuit by NFB or its members.<br>
<br>
Regarding PR: We are not afraid of Uber and others' PR. However,
we are not mindless of it either. For reasons to be mindful, see
above regarding airlines and the media surrounding fake service
animal and ESA mayhem. I think a protest of Uber may be
effective. I am also mindful of similar public perception,
turnout, and other concerns as above with respect to airline/DOT
protests.<br>
<br>
In short, we are working on making the lives of guide dog users
better, particularly with respect to airlines and rideshare
companies. Those have been the absolute priority of the board,
and of my personal NAGDU advocacy since joining the board two
years ago. It is my opinion that we will get farther faster with
the incremental approach I have been pursuing than with the
swing-for-the-fences approach you seem to prefer. After all, the
home-run hitters are also strike-out kings.<br>
<br>
I appreciate your thoughts and hope to continue our discussion
at the business meting.<br>
<br>
Yours,<br>
<br>
Al (undersigned by Raul, Paul, Jessica, and Stacie)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2 Jul 2023 at 9:57:21 AM, Michael Forzano wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""><blockquote type="cite"><pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">It was nice to see quite a bit of discussion about what are arguably the biggest issues of discrimination facing guide dog users today, rideshare and the airlines. Unfortunately, there was not a whole lot in the way of even working towards solutions that truly eliminate these problems. What I heard is that the best hope of changing the airline situation is a pilot program in the FAA reauthorization Act that would create essentially TSA pre-check for guide dogs. This would make things easier for frequent travelers, but what about folks who don't travel often? What about folks who aren't good with technology? And at the end of the day, it still leaves the door open for discrimination at the airport. On rideshare, we are working with Uber on a pilot program where riders can identify themselves as service animal users before a ride and have reports automatically filed if they are denied. Considering some of the drivers I've encountered, I would not be surprised if drivers continue to deny us even if they're threatened by a message in their app. And when they do, Uber has a terrible track record of handling reports and taking action, as we all know. Even during the settlement period when Uber was required to deactivate drivers in certain situations, they rarely did.
It seems to me that the NAGDU board has taken the position that we now live in a world where these discriminations are our reality. As was pointed out by a NAGDU member, guide dog access was better 25 years ago and our rights are being rolled back. But there is no realistic way to go back to "the good old days". We are so afraid of losing more, that we're not willing to demand back the rights that the blind fought so hard for. While that's a perfectly valid position for someone to take at an individual level, is that the position we want the NFB, the voice of the nation's blind, to take?
Protesting was brought up multiple times during the seminar. The response from our leaders was that they did not think it would be effective. The fact is that we don't know if it will be unless we try. Protesting has helped advance civil rights causes in the past, including those of the blind. In my opinion, the NAGDU board should not be worrying about members traveling across the country for a protest that turns out to be ineffective. Advocacy takes work, and I'd like to think that people signing up for a protest are well aware that it probably won't yield immediate results. As was pointed out, we would not have the ADA if disabled advocates hadn't crawled up the steps of the capitol. The NFB has protested on a number of issues as well.
Particularly when it comes to Uber, I think a protest is long overdue. We've sued them, settled with them, and tried to work with them for almost 10 years. It is long past time to change our strategy, and yet we're too afraid because of their PR resources.
Another argument that I heard was that we would be unable to advance legislation due to Republican control of Congress. My question is, do other civil rights orgs put their advocacy on hold when the party that most supports their cause isn't in power? The split in Congress is quite narrow and I doart think it's that far fetched that we could convince some Republicans on the importance of some of our legislation.
I am curious if other members have similar sentiments, and thoughts on what actions we can take. I have thought about bringing a resolution to the convention to make these issues a top priority for the NFB as a whole but I assume it's too late this year. Open to ideas, and happy to help in any way I can. That said, doing this work as an individual doesn't make a lot of sense, we need to be aligned as an organization in order to make real progress.
-Mike
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
NAGDU mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:NAGDU@nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true">NAGDU@nfbnet.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org</a>
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for NAGDU:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/psandoval%40nagdu.org" moz-do-not-send="true">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/psandoval%40nagdu.org</a>
</pre></blockquote></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
NAGDU mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:NAGDU@nfbnet.org" moz-do-not-send="true">NAGDU@nfbnet.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
info for NAGDU:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/braillemasterjustin%40gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/braillemasterjustin%40gmail.com</a><br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Massachusetts-NFB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Massachusetts-NFB@nfbnet.org">Massachusetts-NFB@nfbnet.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/massachusetts-nfb_nfbnet.org">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/massachusetts-nfb_nfbnet.org</a>
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Massachusetts-NFB:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/massachusetts-nfb_nfbnet.org/sweeties2%40verizon.net">http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/massachusetts-nfb_nfbnet.org/sweeties2%40verizon.net</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>