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

[Peter Donahue]

Good morning everyone,

     Services like Uber are covered by the ADA. The ADA does not 
recognize allergies as a disabling condition. If the Uber driver uses 
his own vehicle to transport passengers he/she will need to use another 
vehicle to transport his daughter. Under the settlement any Uber driver 
refusing to transport passengers with service animals will be removed 
from their platform. These are the terms of the settlement. If Uber and 
other ridesharing services are smart they will strictly enforce these 
terms and familiarize their drivers with the ADA and that the refusal to 
transport passengers with service animals will lead to termination of 
their contract situations like this will be nipped in the bud. Since a 
number of cities have kicked ridesharing services out due to this and 
other issues they have a double incentive to comply with all state and 
federal laws concerning various aspects of their operations including 
the carriage of passengers with service animals. They were kicked out of 
Austin last May and almost lost operating privilages here in San 
Antonio. Let them live and learn.

Peter Donahue





david hertweck via Nfbmo 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/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.com 
>
>