[NAGDU] One more thought on SelfID

Fri Jul 7 17:36:35 UTC 2023

Thank you for  your thoughts and support Julie – Just so I’m clear, what do you mean by “not back down?” What do you propose we do in addition to the work we are currently doing and encouraging riders to do? I share your frustration, and would appreciate any suggestions you have that you believe would be effective.

Your concern regarding those who choose not to self-identify as service animal users came up during our discussion of the SelfID option. We were clear and Uber agreed that driver denials of riders who  do not participate in the SelfID system would receive the same heightened-level investigation that Uber recently assigned to service animal denial complaints, which is the highest safety level. That level is also assigned to complaints of physical and sexual assault complaints.  Of course, the riders would have to file the complaints manually through the app or by phone, as they must do now.

While you are correct that  we ar not required to self-identify as guide dog users, Uber and drivers  may, under current regulations, ask service animal users  if the animal is required because of a disability and what work or task the animal has been trained to perform. Those are the only qquestions riders will be asked in the SelfID-registration process. Generally Uber and drivers are not supposed to ask those questions when it is readily-apparent that an animal is a service animal, but given the number of times I encounter apparently-educated adults on the street who ask me “what’s that thing on the dog’s back for?” I suspect it is not readily apparent to many folks. We hope that the improved driver education will help this,but I’m sure it will not eliminate it.

Our belief is that users will choose to SelfID because they will be denied less often due to the driver being informed in the moment by Uber that they must transport this rider with their service animal. We also believe that  riders will appreciate that   drivers who still  deny after being so informed  will automatically and immediately be suspended pending an investigation of an automatically-filed complaint with evidence that the driver had to know they were denying because of a service animal. We believe this will help to weed-out denying drivers because drivers will see that Uber is taking this seriously with its immediate suspensions and eventual terminations.

However, we could be wrong. That is why we are also insisting that Uber better educate all drivers during onboarding and on an  ongoing basis. We welcome other suggestions as to how Uber and Lyft could reduce or eliminate  driver denials.

I remember when I used to take taxis pre-rideshare, and I frequently had drivers refuse to take me with my guide dog. I had to report them to the taxi companies and/or the authorities. Sometimes that was effective, but sometimes the process took months (e.g., when I had to report  a driver to the NYC Taxi and Limousine Commission, which    continually-  issueed continuances when the driver said they couldn’t  make it to the hearing). The law was on our side then, as it is now, yet we never eliminated denials entirely. I suspect we will never eliminate rideshare denials either. As they say, “haters gonna hate.” Even if we sued Uber and won, we would have to tell the judge what to order Uber to do. Other than inform riders of the outcome of investigations and to provide more and faster data on denial complaints and driver terminations, I honestly do not know what else I would order Uber to do beyond what we have already asked for and been promised. Even a judge cannot simply order Uber to eliminate denials, as courts recognize that Uber cannot simply wave a magic wand and fix things. However, if you or others on the list have thoughts, I welcome them.

Again, thank you for your support.

/Æ

On 6 Jul 2023, at 14:19, Julie A. Orozco wrote:

> I see a few issues with self ID.
>
> First, since we are not required to identify ourselves as service
> animal users, some of us still will not feel comfortable doing so. I
> am concerned that drivers will refuse service animal users and claim
> they should have been told ahead of time that the rider had a service
> animal. Then Uber will fail to take action because they want to
> encourage users to self-identify. This would put disabled people with
> service animals in a corner where we are pretty much forced to
> identify, even though legally, we are not required to do so.
>
> I also just don't think this will discourage drivers from strategizing
> about how to avoid taking us. Drivers come up with all sorts of great
> reasons why they don't have to take us: claiming we aren't wearing
> masks, driving away and pretending they couldn't find us, forcing us
> to cancel the ride and then claiming we were being difficult, etc. I
> do not see how self-ID will fix these specific reasons except for the
> mask claims, which aren't applicable anymore. Uber drivers can still
> just drive right by us and claim they couldn't find us. Self-ID won't
> solve that, and it can't because Uber drivers probably always need a
> way out in case they really can't find a passenger. It is my
> understanding that some drivers actually communicate about how to get
> out of taking service animals.
>
> I was extremely disappointed by the Uber presentation earlier. Their
> representative didn't say anything we hadn't already heard, and she
> did not sound sincere. Drivers are getting braver, and they know there
> is no accountability. They see this as a pass to continue breaking the
> law.
>
> Finally, I have concerns that self-ID will not fix issues that come up
> when drivers claim they have allergies or don't understand for
> cultural/language barrier reasons that they need to take our dogs. Is
> Uber going to account for those problems when it communicates with the
> drivers about taking our service dogs? I remember Lyft telling us last
> year that they educate drivers in several different languages. At the
> time, I thought Uber had the same thing. But at the meeting the other
> night, it sounded like drivers are not even consistently educated
> about service dogs in the first place. Perhaps you have accounted this
> in your discussions with Uber, but it is a concern that we have to
> address in any system we implement with them.
>
> I understand that we are doing all we can, and I have a lot of respect
> for the work that is being done. But I absolutely have my doubts about
> self-ID and think we should not back down. Uber is showing us that
> they will continue to give their drivers an out, particularly since
> this self-ID system is their baby and will be under their control.
>
> Thanks for your work,
>
> Julie
>
>
> On 7/6/23, Tina Thomas via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> Here is some food for thought on this issue.
>> [image: Picture1.jpg]
>> California Gov. Newsom Signs Bill to Combat Emotional Support Animal Fraud -
>> Canine Companions
>> canine.org
>>
>>
>> Tina Thomas Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 6, 2023, at 6:08 AM, Al Elia via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> That is on Uber. I am confident that no blind person who uses a guide
>>> dog, whether self-trained or not, is going to be found to have falsely
>>> claimed to be using a service animal as a guide, whether self-trained or
>>> program-trained. Right now there is impugnity for falsely claiming your
>>> pet as a service animal. At least there will be a credible threat from
>>> Uber that you will be permanently banned for doing so in the future. How
>>> they enforce that is up to them.
>>>
>>> On 5 Jul 2023, at 10:41, carcione at access.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> How will Uber investigate false claims that a dog is a service dog?
>>>>
>>>> Tracy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>
>>>> From: NAGDU <nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Al Elia via NAGDU
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2023 9:40 AM
>>>>
>>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Al Elia <al.elia at aol.com>
>>>>
>>>> Subject: [NAGDU] One more thought on SelfID
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some members have expressed doubt that SelfID will reduce denials. I
>>>> cannot say for certain that it will. I have already explained why we
>>>> believe that it will reduce the frustration and friction of filing
>>>> complaints. However, another reason we believe it may reduce denials is
>>>> that the driver will receive a message from Uber, not the rider, about
>>>> the presence of a service animal. We believe that drivers may trust Uber
>>>> more than they trust riders about that. Uber will also be informing
>>>> riders on the SelfID registration page that Uber will investigate and
>>>> remove riders who falsely claim use of a service animal in order to bring
>>>> their pets with them. We believe that may also reduce denials.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I said earlier, I will inform folks when SelfID becomes available.
>>>> Please be patient though, as I do not expect it to become available until
>>>> later this year due to Uber’s need to develop and test all aspects of the
>>>> system, including to ensure accessibility and user-understanding.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /Æ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 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/carcione%40access.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/judotina48kg%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Julie A. Orozco
> MM Vocal Performance, 2015; American University Washington College of
> Law, JD Candidate 2023