[nfbmi-talk] Fw: doj weighs in on nfb uber suit
suncat0 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 26 18:07:16 UTC 2014
I don't think we stand opposed to civil rights for the blind. Speaking for me and me only, I have had enough of one or two people who say that they are the ultimate authority on civil rights, endlessly tell us what's wrong with almost everything under the stars and demand that everybody else "do something about it," as they find even more problems for everyone else to solve. That's no way to run a railroad, or so it seems to me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Robinson via nfbmi-talk" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2014 8:40
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] Fw: doj weighs in on nfb uber suit
----- Original Message -----
From: joe harcz Comcast
To: Larry Posont NFBMI Pres.
Cc: terry Eagle ; Mark Eagle ; mary wurtzel ; Terri Wilcox NFB Sec ; David Robinson NFB MI ; Derek Moore ; Larry D Keeler ; J.J. Meddaugh NFB MI
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:09 AM
Subject: doj weighs in on nfb uber suit
It is interesting how federationists actually fight for the rights of blind persons in San Francisco under the ADA. Yet, we seem to here in Michigan for the most part ignore rights of the blind including the right to access information in our most effective format and in a timely manner from state agencies; the right to have raised character and Braille signage on every permanent room and the right not to be discriminated against in hiring practices by the likes of BSBP.
I thought we were a civil rights organization and the ADA and Section 504 are civil rights laws.
Obama administration takes sides in disability suit against Uber
By Bob Egelko
Updated 2:43 pm, Tuesday, December 23, 2014
The Obama administration weighed in Tuesday on the side of advocates for the blind in a San Francisco federal court suit accusing ride-on-demand company
Uber of discriminating against passengers with guide dogs.
In its court filing, the
did not endorse the specific allegations of discrimination but said companies like Uber are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires
equal treatment and reasonable accommodations for disabled customers.
Uber has denied discriminating but has also argued that it is not a public-service provider a public accommodation covered by the disability law.
The ADA applies to private entities that are primarily engaged in providing transportation services, even if a company is not a public accommodation,
said the filing by Justice Department lawyers and U.S. Attorney
Uber also argued that it does not directly provide transportation services but merely signs contracts with independent drivers. The Justice Department countered
that a transportation company may not contract away its ADA responsibilities and is covered by the law if it operates a demand-responsive system.
List of 2 items
Uber cleans up under shower of cash from Baidu, other investors
When its time to flee, Uber raises its rates
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbmi-talk:
More information about the NFBMI-Talk