[nagdu] Certification was RE: Uber sued for allegedly refusingrides to the blind andputting a dog in the trunk

[Aaron Cannon]

Hi Valerie.

It's clear you've put a good deal of thought into this, and I hope you
haven't felt overwhelmed by all the replies.

The major concerns I have with your idea are first that it seems like
you are proposing a system of licensure without accountability.  Would
the trainer ever be held accountable for any action of the dog?  If
not, then what's the point?  Similarly, would the AAPDT need to alter
their exams to test for items specific to training guide dogs?

Second, how would a business owner validate an ID card for a dog
presented by a handler?  Would the AAPDT run some sort of validation
service?  Who would pay for that service?  Would that cost not be
passed along in the form of an increased fee for trainers?

You say that a legal penalty could be put in place to punish those who
try to falsely claim their dogs are service dogs.  Did you know that
there are already a number of such laws on the books around the
country, yet when was the last time you heard of someone being
prosecuted under one of these laws?  So, if the current laws are
presumably ineffective, how would more laws help?

Under your plan, we would be certifying the trainer, and by extension
the dogs trained by that trainer.  What if I were to purchase a
lightly used service dog off of Craigslist, or loan my wife my guide
dog, even though she can see just fine?  How would identification of
the dog help business owners know that she has no right to use a
service dog, even though the dog is in fact a service dog?

If the AAPDT ever decided to cease training, or if they were forced
out of business by circumstance, but we had laws on the books
requiring dogs to be trained by trainers certified by AAPDT, where
would that leave dog handlers?  Or similarly, what happens if the
AAPDT decides to suddenly raise their rates, or to require a great
deal more qualifications, such as a degree in animal behavior, from
trainers?  Perhaps unlikely, but those are the risks you run if you
make a private organization the gatekeepers to people's primary
mobility aids.

Finally, and perhaps the biggest concern for me, is simply the idea
that any business owner or employee who's premises I enter would have
the right to request identification.  I think the blind and other
disabled individuals are already sufficiently marginalized.  We don't
need the added indignity of being forced to produce our papers just
because we decided to run to the store, or pick our kids up from the
local Recreation Center.

I do of course realize that it would be my dog's papers, and not mine,
but I think the difference is so small as to be irrelevant.

Just my thoughts on all this.

Aaron


On 9/12/14, Valerie Gibson via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> First,
>
> I can see my point was missed.
> I wasn't talking about wether or not to certify the dog, but the trainer.
>
> Who would do the certification?  I would say the ccpdt.  They just give
> trainers a title to work with, which gives them some credibility in some
> client's eyes.  They don't train trainers on anything. It's up to the
> trainer to do his or her research and to fulfill the requirements to become
> certified.
>
> How would the trainer get to testing sites?  If the trainer is training a
> guide dog, I'd hope he or she is mobile enough to get to said sites.  Also,
> if you look on their website, you can see that they do provide special
> acomidations for testing.
>
> And speaking of special acomidations, it also states on their website that
> they do not discriminate on the basis of disability.
>
> How will people pay for certification?  If you're training a dog, again, I'd
> hope you'd have some money to put down for certification. Basically, if you
> have the money to train a dog, you more than have the money to pay for the
> certification.  I think, when I add it up, it's about $300ish for three
> years, maybe 500 if you're going for a more advanced certificate.
>
> On the heels of that, if dog training, like school teaching, were a license,
> I'm sure there would be criminal penalties for falsifying a dog training
> license.
>
> If the handler got a dog from a trainer with  a license, the trainer could
> give out a card or something saying who the dog is, what breed, who it was
> trained by, and give their license number.  Again, this is all just
> brainstorming.
>
> It would be nice to not have to go through these measures, but when you have
> people passing off their pets as service dogs, you run the risk of putting
> yourself, your dogs and others in danger because you're working with an
> animal that can be harmed or harm others.
>
> In my opinion, it's too dangerous not to have some form of ID. I just wish
> the ID had more legal backing to it.  I don't say this for the guide dogs or
> the guide dog owners, but for their safety against those who pass their pets
> off as service dogs.
>
> My point earlier was that dog certification won't work, so you're right on
> that.  It won't work because it is too grey, and that's why dog training
> needs to be a licensure program rather than a certifiable program.
>
> And, I don't care what a service dog is trained to do for an owner.  I doubt
> any of it is to growl/bark/snap at other dogs. Every service dog should, in
> the beginning, be taught basic obedience.
>
> And for my last bit:
>
> I'm not sure how this relates to the dog being put in the trunk.  I'm sure
> it relates, as all conversations do, by a string of topics that made their
> way to this topic.
>
> I just brought up why having a certification  for a dog was such a legal
> grey area.  I'd had this discussion on Facebook earlier this week, and I've
> run into two "service dogs" in the same week, and quite frankly, I'm just a
> little tired of the "my lil mean terror is a service dog for whatever".
>
> PS: I'm not synacle when someone tells me they have a service dog or a
> service dog in training.  It's only when said dog acts aggressively to my
> dog or others that I really start to get pissed off.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 12, 2014, at 3:37 AM, Larry D Keeler via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>> times.
>>> 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
>>> 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
>>> center?
>>> 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
>>> good
>>> 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
>>> the
>>> guilty. -Jessica Mitford, author, journalist, and civil rights activist
>>> (1917-1996)
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I posted a rant on facebook about something relating to this, so I'll say
>>> it
>>> 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
>>> dogs.
>>>
>>> If I printed out a card saying, "American Akita Guide dog Foundation",
>>> made
>>> 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
>>> foundation".
>>>
>>> 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
>>> call
>>> himself a dog trainer.
>>>
>>> There is no such thing as a licensed dog trainer.  For the trainers of
>>> guide
>>> dogs, those owner trained and those in programs, the only thing that
>>> trainer
>>> has that an ordinary citizen doesn't have is knowledge in dog training
>>> and,
>>> 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
>>> train
>>> 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
>>> in
>>> public places is so grey.
>>>
>>> In my oppinion, if we licensed dog training and made trainers need a
>>> license
>>> 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
>>> "therapy
>>> dog" who is just a pet.
>>>
>>> I believe ID cards could be given out to handlers of service dogs that
>>> would
>>> point to the trainer or something.  And because dog training would be a
>>> license, the trainer could face reprecussions by falsifying any
>>> information.
>>>
>>> This suggestion is just one that's recently come to mind.  I'm not sure
>>> how,
>>> 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
>>> dogs
>>> in shops mostly it would educate people on dog behavior and everything
>>> else
>>> I've been saying that people should study.  In order to become certified
>>> by
>>> 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
>>> consuming,
>>> 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
>>> guy
>>> 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
>>> the
>>> 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
>>> you,
>>> to make you look like you are not capable of doing for  yourself, and
>>> wished
>>> they would take that extra moment to do something for themselves, owner
>>> trainers have a really hard time going behind program trained dog
>>> handlers,
>>> who do tend to use their ID a lot.
>>>> Again, just my opinion, and by no means is it what everyone else
>>>> believes.
>>>> Best,
>>>> Amber
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>> there
>>> 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
>>> stupid
>>> 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
>>> the
>>> trunk in the first place.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> 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>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uber sued for allegedly refusing rides to the blind and putting a
>>>>>> dog in the trunk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By Gail Sullivan September 10 Washington Post
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Source:
>>>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/09/10/uber-su
>>>>>> ed-for-a
>>>>>> llegedly-refusing-rides-to-the-blind-and-putting-a-dog-in-the-trunk/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>> door.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>> transportation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> to
>>> 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
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/violingirl30794%4
>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/thetraveler87%40gm
>>>>> ail.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/valandkayla%40gmail
>>>> .com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40wavecable.co
>>> m
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/lkeeler%40comcast.net
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/valandkayla%40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/cannona%40fireantproductions.com
>