[Nfbmo] Deputies: Uber driver refused ride to blind man, service dog

Julie McGinnity kaybaycar at gmail.com
Fri Jul 8 15:09:08 UTC 2016


The problem is that the right for people with disabilities to work
service animals in public spaces trumps any concern over allergy.
Guide and service dogs are welcome in taxis, on trains, etc.  There is
no qualifier in the law about other passengers or drivers having
allergies.

If these drivers received better training, then they would know that
they were required to pick up people with service animals.  If the
allergies are that much of a problem, then they would consider
themselves disabled.  We learned about this in staff training for the
NAGDU information and advocacy hotline.  If a person's allergy rises
to the level of a disability, then they can receive an accommodation.
This is extremely rare.  I think only about 0.01 percent of people
have allergies this severe.  I can check that number if you are
interested.

Bottom line: the law is on the side of those with service animals.
Uber drivers need to be trained, and I am absolutely appalled by what
happened here.  Uber is a service offered to the public, so they need
to follow the ADA.

On 7/8/16, david hertweck via Nfbmo <nfbmo at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> I think this was handled in intirely  wrong way.  If the driver stated his
> problem and offered to get another car there then both parties needs could
> have been met.   The driver or his famly could be extreamly lergic.  The
> driver was intirely wrong in handling it in the way he did.
> In this problem we must be carefull that all needs are met.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Garcia via Nfbmo
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 6:26 AM
> To: NFB of Missouri Mailing List
> Cc: Daniel Garcia
> Subject: [Nfbmo] Deputies: Uber driver refused ride to blind man, service
> dog
>
>
> His daughter is allergic to dogs, so he didn't want to allow a service dog
> in his vehicle.
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.fox4news.com/news/u-s-world/170689636-story
>
> We have all heard stories of drivers refusing service to dog handling teams
>
> on the grounds they are allergic or fear dogs. But Uber introduces a new
> wrinkle into this battle. Since they use their own private cars, they can
> claim that relatives are allergic to dogs to refuse service.
>
> This is not something to be overlooked in light of the proposed settlement
> with Uber now pending in the court.
>
> Regards
>
> Daniel Garcia
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfbmo mailing list
> Nfbmo at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmo_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Nfbmo:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmo_nfbnet.org/david.hertweck%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfbmo mailing list
> Nfbmo at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmo_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Nfbmo:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmo_nfbnet.org/kaybaycar%40gmail.com
>


-- 
Julie A. McGinnity
President, National Federation of the Blind Performing Arts Division,
Second Vice President, National Federation of the Blind of Missouri
"For we walk by faith, not by sight"
2 Cor. 7




More information about the NFBMO mailing list