[Nfbmo] {Spam?} Re: Deputies: Uber driver refused ride to blind man, service dog

DanFlasar at aol.com DanFlasar at aol.com
Fri Jul 8 19:11:43 UTC 2016

And this is exactly the problem with Uber, or Lift or any other service  
that puts all the risk on the 'contractor' (Uber drivers are not considered  
employees, legally).   A cab driver drives for a company vehicle,  carries 
company insurance, is paid a salary and receives all tips on top of  that.  
The more they drive, the nore they make, at little personal  risk.
    Uber drivers pay for everything themselves (gas,  insurance, 
maintenance ), provide their own vehicle, and are not allowed to  accept tips.  If an 
Uber driver gets in an accident, it's tough luck for  the driver - he is out 
everything.  If a cab driver is in an accident, the  company bears the cost 
- the driver is out nothing, though he could lose his job  if he is at 
 So this is the problem - a cab is just as much a public conveyance as  a 
bus or a train or a plane - there are hard fought laws that guarantee the  
right of people to bring their service dogs into such vehicles.
   But when it's your own car, that's something quite  different.  Unlike a 
cabbie, an Uber driver DOES take his car home, and if  a family member is 
allergic to dog fur, that's a legitimate concern.
       Right now, the status of Uber drivers  is in legal limbo - they are 
not considered to be employees of the company, do  not have assigned shifts, 
have no benefits whatsoever, and can refuse to take on  riders for their 
own reasons.    
      Full disclosure, Uber is just the latest  example of the eroding 
status of workers rights.  Uber has been thrown out  of cities and countries all 
over the world, primarily because it's business  model is designed to evade 
the  'public' part of 'public  transportation').    I hope Uber is taken to 
court over this  issue .  Uber has had many challenges to it's business 
model in the last  few  years - they were thrown out of Austin, Texas because 
they refused to  comply with state law that all cab drivers have their 
fingerprints scanned for  criminal records.  Right now they skirt public safety 
laws via their  business mnodel - courts may help to sort this out.
   And of course, not all Uber drivers will refuse to allow a  service dog 
in their vehicle, but it appears that right now, they are under no  legal 
obligation to do so.
       This case could be a  game-changer.
In a message dated 7/8/2016 6:29:19 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
nfbmo at nfbnet.org writes:

His  daughter is allergic to dogs, so he didn't want to allow a service dog 
in his  vehicle.



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.


Daniel  Garcia

Nfbmo  mailing  list
Nfbmo at nfbnet.org
To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for  

More information about the NFBMO mailing list