[nagdu] Certification was RE: Uber sued for allegedly refusingrides to the blind andputting a dog in the trunk
Larry D Keeler
lkeeler at comcast.net
Fri Sep 12 09:37:45 UTC 2014
Again Nicole, I'm more interested why they put the dog in the trunk and why
the handler let it happen. My guess is that they needed the ride and they
felt bullied into conceeding. Ideas and oppinions will keep going on the
other issue but putting dogs in the trunk is not usually done over here in
this country with pets or service animals! But being a service animal, it
should have benn what our dogs do and riding at they're feet. Certification
or not isn't really a good excuse to put the dog in the boot for any reason!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicole Torcolini via nagdu" <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
To: "'Valerie Gibson'" <valandkayla at gmail.com>; "'NAGDU Mailing List,the
National Association of Guide Dog Users'" <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:14 PM
Subject: [nagdu] Certification was RE: Uber sued for allegedly refusingrides
to the blind andputting a dog in the trunk
> We have been round and round on this list about this topic numerous
> I know that some of the newer members were not included in those
> discussions, so I will summarize here, but I would really prefer not to
> start the whole discussion again as it always ends up in the same place.
> The idea of certification sounds fine in theory, but, as soon as you start
> filling in the fine grained details, it becomes apparent that the cons
> outweigh the pros. Who will do the certification? How do you make sure
> that entity does not purposefully deny people certification? What will the
> dogs be certified in? It may be fairly straightforward for guide dogs, but
> there are several different kinds of service dogs, many of which are
> specifically trained to meat the unique needs of their handlers. Who will
> pay for the certification? How will people get to the certification
> And, above all, this will not stop people from making fake certification
> cards or certificates or whatever. It also most certainly will not change
> the perceptions that some people have about service dogs. Yes, some people
> had a bad experience with a fake service dog, and that is why they don't
> like service dogs. But some people just don't like service dogs for no
> reason, and having a certification process is not going to change that.
> And, to end with a quote from the email for today for A Word a Day:
> A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
> You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass
> guilty. -Jessica Mitford, author, journalist, and civil rights activist
> Nicole and Lexia
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Valerie Gibson
> via nagdu
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:55 AM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind
> andputting a dog in the trunk
> I posted a rant on facebook about something relating to this, so I'll say
> again here.
> The only thing that gives your guide dog programs credibility is the work
> they've put into making the public aware of the fact that they train guide
> If I printed out a card saying, "American Akita Guide dog Foundation",
> it look all official,etc, it legally would have the same merrit as a guide
> dog program, even though there is no "american Akita Guide Dog
> With dog trainers: Your next door neighbor could put a sign in his yard
> saying, "bob's dog training Business", and he would be in his right to
> himself a dog trainer.
> There is no such thing as a licensed dog trainer. For the trainers of
> dogs, those owner trained and those in programs, the only thing that
> has that an ordinary citizen doesn't have is knowledge in dog training
> maybe, a certificate from a program to show that they do have knowledge in
> dog training.
> I've said that I intended to become certified by the CCPDT, and while this
> would be an achievement for me, it would make me no less qualified to
> dogs than someone who has my knowledge but does not have the certificate.
> In fact, the only thing that would make my certificate valid is the fact
> that the certification council of professional dog trainers is publicly
> recognized as an institution that works with dog trainers.
> This is why the business of service dogs and their handlers and trainers
> public places is so grey.
> In my oppinion, if we licensed dog training and made trainers need a
> to train service animals, we might be able to illiminate the number of
> people who come into shops with an ESA (emotional suport animal" or
> dog" who is just a pet.
> I believe ID cards could be given out to handlers of service dogs that
> point to the trainer or something. And because dog training would be a
> license, the trainer could face reprecussions by falsifying any
> This suggestion is just one that's recently come to mind. I'm not sure
> legistically, dog trainer licenses would work or how that it should affect
> the handler, but I think it should be done for service dogs at the very
> least. Partly this would seek to iliminate the problem of fake service
> in shops mostly it would educate people on dog behavior and everything
> I've been saying that people should study. In order to become certified
> the CCPDT, you need X amount of hours working with dogs, and you need to
> take a test on dog behavior, training edicate, etc. It does cost, but if
> you're training your own dog, it's cheaper than that. It is time
> but no more than training your own dog.
> In a nutshell, ID cards or no, they legally have no merrit accept maybe by
> some institution or state standards, and even that is grey because dog
> training isn't licensed practice.
> Anyway, just my thoughts.
> On Sep 11, 2014, at 11:31 AM, Amber M via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> Hi Abby,
>> Before I say anything about the situation, I would like to say that this
> is just my opinion. So it is Benoni means correct, or upheld by majority.
> But. And I do reiterate, this is my opinion. When someone who attends a
> dog school shows an ID to get out of a stressful situation, they then make
> it difficult for the owner trained guy dog who comes after them. Because
> business then expects that an ID will be shown, and can be expected.
>> I will not pretend that it is easier to stand up for your rights when you
> are in a hurry, or when the person just doesn't seem to get it, etc. etc.
> But just like you don't want a blind person who attends a school before
> to make you look like you are not capable of doing for yourself, and
> they would take that extra moment to do something for themselves, owner
> trainers have a really hard time going behind program trained dog
> who do tend to use their ID a lot.
>> Again, just my opinion, and by no means is it what everyone else
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Abigail Bolling via nagdu
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> The problem of explaining that the dog is a service animal, I know this
> may sound harsh, but as far as I know, the service animal schools give
> handlers ID cards for a reason. A lot of Dog users that I know refuse to
> carry them, to which my opinion is a lot of situations could possibly be
> avoided just by showing an ID card.
>>> I know we shouldn't have to show an ID card to make our point and it is
> certainly annoying, but sometimes it is just easier to go that extra
> step to save a little headache later.
>>> Also, I know I said this on another post about this article, but it is
> the responsibility of the handler to know where their dog is at all times,
> so why did the handler let the dog be taken away from him and placed in
> trunk in the first place.
>>> Abby and my little Shadow, Jada.
>>> Abigail Bolling
>>> Wright State University: Social Work
>>> "Keep a smile on your face and a song in your heart, and just let the
>>> music play." (Julie Anderson Diamond)
>>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Ginger Kutsch via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind and putting a
>>>> dog in the trunk
>>>> By Gail Sullivan September 10 Washington Post
>>>> An advocacy group for the blind is suing the app-based ride-sharing
>>>> service Uber, alleging the company discriminates against passengers
>>>> with service dogs.
>>>> The federal civil rights suit filed Tuesday by the California
>>>> chapter of the National Federation of the Blind cites instances in
>>>> California and elsewhere when blind Uber customers summoned a car
>>>> only to be refused a ride once the driver saw them with a service
>>>> dog. In some cases, drivers allegedly abandoned blind travelers in
>>>> extreme weather and charged cancellation fees after denying them rides,
> the complaint said.
>>>> The complaint filed in a Northern California District Court cites
>>>> one instance where a California UberX driver put a service dog in
>>>> the trunk and refused to pull over when the blind passenger realized
> where the animal was.
>>>> On another occasion a passenger was trying to explain that his dog
>>>> was not a pet but a service animal when the driver allegedly cursed
>>>> at him and accelerated abruptly, nearly injuring the dog and
>>>> striking the passenger's friend, who is also blind, with an open car
>>>> The group said it's aware of more than 30 times blind customers were
>>>> denied rides in violation of the American with Disabilities Act and
>>>> California state law.
>>>> As a result, blind passengers are confronting unexpected delays and
>>>> "face the degrading experience of being denied a basic service that
>>>> is available to all other paying customers," the complaint said.
>>>> Services such as Uber are quickly supplanting traditional taxis, a
>>>> service blind people rely on due to the limitations of public
>>>> The National Federation of the Blind wants Uber to educate its
>>>> drivers about disability rights and punish the violators in addition
>>>> to providing a way for disabled passengers to immediately register
>>>> complaints when they are refused rides because of service dogs.
>>>> In a statement reported by the San Francisco Examiner, Uber said its
>>>> policy is to terminate drivers who refuse to transport service
>>>> animals. "The Uber app is built to expand access to transportation
>>>> options for all, including users with visual impairments and other
> disabilities," the statement said.
>>>> However, Uber allegedly told some passengers it can't control what
>>>> drivers do because they are independent contractors. The company
>>>> advised them to let drivers know about their animals ahead of time,
>>>> said the Federation, which filed suit after Uber rejected its request
> negotiate a solution.
>>>> The group claims the company closely monitors and controls its
>>>> drivers by managing payments and services through the app, and by
>>>> assessing driver performance based on customer feedback.
>>>> In September 2013,California's Public Utilities Commission
>>>> classified UberX as a transportation provider because it functions
>>>> like a taxi dispatch. The commission also said that UberX may not
>>>> discriminate against the disabled, the Federation noted.
>>>> Figuring out whether to treat Uber like a traditional taxi service
>>>> or something else is the subject of heated debate across the
>>>> country. Taxi services are required by federal law to serve the
>>>> disabled, even if drivers are independent contractors.
>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
More information about the NAGDU