Uber Must Face Lawsuit Claiming Bias Against The Blind

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Arguing that the National Federation of the Blind lacked standing to sue under the ADA is an interesting tactic. I think Uber might want to invest a little money in lawyers that specialize in these types of lawsuits. :p

In a decision late Friday night, U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins in San Jose, California, said the plaintiffs could pursue a claim that Uber is a "travel service" subject to potential liability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The judge also rejected Uber's arguments that the plaintiffs, including the National Federation of the Blind of California, lacked standing to sue under the ADA and state laws protecting the disabled.
 
Do Taxis allow service dogs? I honestly don't know.

In any case, it seems to be up to the individual who drives, not Uber.
 
Do Taxis allow service dogs? I honestly don't know.

In any case, it seems to be up to the individual who drives, not Uber.

Yes taxis do.

As for Uber's responsibility, I didn't see a few things addressed in the article (likely because Uber didn't respond). First and foremost, does Uber's policy require drivers to accept service animals? Second, after a passenger reported a driver failed to accept their service animal (or locked the dog in the damn trunk and then wouldn't pull over! :mad:) what actions did they take with the driver, if any?

If Uber doesn't require it in their driver agreement, and/or didn't discipline their drivers in any way, I could see them losing this.
 
They can't really expect Uber to employ blind drivers. Why would Uber want blind drivers? ;)
 
Completely idiotic. So if I want to use my Honda CRX to ferry people around that i want to pick up and that want to get picked up, I can't because it won't fit say a moo-cows powered scooter or a blind person's dog?

Go eat a dick and call a taxi service that can meet your special needs. This is literally the definition of a tiny minority ruining a good thing for everyone with entitlement mentality.

Special need? Look for a special service.
 
They should probably just kill themselves instead of expecting society to assist in meeting their needs, amirite?

Damn blind people, so entitled seeking to bring their service dog, trained to be in public, into a car. Next thing you know, they'll think they're people!
 
Yet another smear campaign at the behest of the taxi companies--which means the taxi companies are scared to death of Uber.
 
This is a tough one to be honest. On one hand Uber isn't like any other service in that drivers are providing their personal vehicles. It isn't like a regular taxi service where vehicles are Fleet. This actually is one of the things that stopped me from taking a gig as an uber driver to pick up some extra cash. My personal vehicle, I don't want your animal in it. It isn't a matter of if it is a service animal or not, I don't want animals in my vehicle at all. It is tough to call how this will be ruled, I tend to think that due to a lack of an actual vehicle fleet, they might be able to get out of this one. Then again, no one wants to rule against the disabled so it will probably go in their favor right or wrong.
 
They should probably just kill themselves instead of expecting society to assist in meeting their needs, amirite?

Damn blind people, so entitled seeking to bring their service dog, trained to be in public, into a car. Next thing you know, they'll think they're people!

I am going to sue OEM and laptop makes for not adding a brail keyboard option on all of their laptops / keyboards.....
 
They should probably just kill themselves instead of expecting society to assist in meeting their needs, amirite?
Or they could, I don't know, accept the reality that they have a unique disability and special needs, needs that are not the same as the average population and so its not normal to expect the entire population to change to accommodate a tiny segment of the population. Its much more reasonable to expect the tiny segment of the population to accept they have special needs, and thus seek special services to meet that need.

Not EVERY uber driver should be forced to drive a car big enough to fit service animals or have ramps installed to deal with the powered scooter of a morbidly obese woman. You have a special need, call a special service that caters to that instead of expecting that EVERY uber taxi driver has to meet YOUR individual special needs. This isn't rocket science.
 
I am going to sue OEM and laptop makes for not adding a brail keyboard option on all of their laptops / keyboards.....
Don't even joke about that!!! You give them that idea, and I promise you there will be an Obama petition and lawsuit in a week's time! Damn you, no delete option! Quick! MODS! :p
 
I am going to sue OEM and laptop makes for not adding a brail keyboard option on all of their laptops / keyboards.....

The scope of the ADA doesn't extend to electronics at that level, however Windows certainly comes with a variety of accessibility options for the blind and deaf ... and there are definitely Braille keyboards available (for people that need them)

Uber could potentially deal with this by allowing customers with special needs to include that in their profile ... unless all the drivers refuse to service them (or start to charge exorbitant fees for the disabled) this would alleviate this issue ... the only way out of this for Uber would be if they could prove they are not public transportation (limit their services to members only and have a subscription fee or something for the service) ... as a public transportation provider they are likely to fall squarely into the scope of the ADA Title III (only as a private club they might be able to avoid it) ;)
 
I don't use uber, but I wouldn't let a dog in my car either, for any reason.
 
Not EVERY uber driver should be forced to drive a car big enough to fit service animals or have ramps installed to deal with the powered scooter of a morbidly obese woman. You have a special need, call a special service that caters to that instead of expecting that EVERY uber taxi driver has to meet YOUR individual special needs. This isn't rocket science.

They're not asking for ramps or large cars or fitting obese people. They're simply asking that they follow the legal mandate of the ADA to allow their service animals into the car. If you don't want to follow the rules of the industry/don't want service animals in your car, you don't need to sign up for Uber. Really, you'll likely pick up more dirt, disease and grime in your car from the random people than the occasional service animal.
 
And as for the keyboard...it's already in a layout you can tell with your fingers, no braille needed. :p
 
The scope of the ADA doesn't extend to electronics at that level, however Windows certainly comes with a variety of accessibility options for the blind and deaf ... and there are definitely Braille keyboards available (for people that need them)
EXACTLY! A special product available for people that need them.

You're not changing every keyboard to be blind friendly and dwith giant keys for the morbidly obese.

But with paid transportation, you're saying that EVERY vehicle has to be blind friendly, and that's BS. They should be looking for a special service available for people that need them, the same as the keyboard example.
 
They're not asking for ramps or large cars or fitting obese people.
Why are vision impaired people more entitled to special treatment than mobility impaired people? I understand that blind people could give two shits about people in wheelchairs, but find it ironic that they turn around and expect more from everyone else.
 
Are they really expecting more? If you're providing a transportation service, let the damn dog in the car. I'm not seeing the end of the world here. Taxis are not, on the other hand, expected to all handle a wheelchair as that is a much larger burden to deal with. Cab companies are, in fact, required to have some in their fleet to meet these people's needs. The problem is that there aren't quite enough to create enough of a market demand to have their needs met.

Also, providing these accommodations allow for them to be productive members of society.
 
For people saying Uber should be able to do what they want, that was whole issue that caused most of the ADA laws. Companies won't do anything to service a minority unless forced to and to put it another way it is anti-competitive to force one group (Taxis etcetera) to comply and not another. Uber didn't have to compete in this market, but if they want to, they are going to have to play by the same rules.
 
EXACTLY! A special product available for people that need them.

You're not changing every keyboard to be blind friendly and dwith giant keys for the morbidly obese.

But with paid transportation, you're saying that EVERY vehicle has to be blind friendly, and that's BS. They should be looking for a special service available for people that need them, the same as the keyboard example.

I don't think the requirement is for every vehicle to do it as long as some are available that do it ... the wording of the ADA is:

Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment. They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or expense, given the public accommodation's resources.

The operative word is probably going to come down to "reasonable modifications" ... I suspect that the major taxi services don't necessarily have all their vehicles in compliance with all aspects of the ADA, but they do make sure that there are enough so that both the disabled and non-disabled can utilize their services (Supershuttle for instance doesn't have lifts on all their vans but they do have some vans with lifts)

I am not an Uber user so I don't know that much about their service but I assume that they have some sort of user profile for the fares and drivers ... perhaps they could have the UI offer a range of special requests (if it doesn't already) for things like smokers, access for service animals, access for wheelchair, etc ... I assume that Uber uses some sort of bidding system for the drivers so they could note these requirements in the bid request (and also check the requirements against the driver profile) ... seems like that would not be an enormous bar to hurdle ... otherwise they can wait to see how the courts handle this (just like all their other lawsuits globally)
 
The scope of the ADA doesn't extend to electronics at that level, however Windows certainly comes with a variety of accessibility options for the blind and deaf ... and there are definitely Braille keyboards available (for people that need them)

Uber could potentially deal with this by allowing customers with special needs to include that in their profile ... unless all the drivers refuse to service them (or start to charge exorbitant fees for the disabled) this would alleviate this issue ... the only way out of this for Uber would be if they could prove they are not public transportation (limit their services to members only and have a subscription fee or something for the service) ... as a public transportation provider they are likely to fall squarely into the scope of the ADA Title III (only as a private club they might be able to avoid it) ;)
That would be discrimination facilitated by uber, the safe thing to do is just for uber to make it policy not to deny them service and punish at some level complaints particular to the issue. Else they are just opening themselves up to lawsuits. You can't deny service animals for public transportation you don't really have any ground to stand on unless you're somehow ferrying around people in some 2 door tiny ass car that wont fit more than one person or anything else.
 
Are they really expecting more? If you're providing a transportation service, let the damn dog in the car.
1) Some people have dog allergies
2) Dogs tend to have long nails and can tear up a leather seat
3) Some dogs shed vast amounts of hair
4) Some dogs sitting down with their bare anus on your upholstery will leave a shit stain
5) Dogs are more likely than your average person to drool all over the place and bark at you.

I sure as hell wouldn't ever allow a dog in my car.
 
1) Some people have dog allergies
2) Dogs tend to have long nails and can tear up a leather seat
3) Some dogs shed vast amounts of hair
4) Some dogs sitting down with their bare anus on your upholstery will leave a shit stain
5) Dogs are more likely than your average person to drool all over the place and bark at you.

I sure as hell wouldn't ever allow a dog in my car.

Although some service dogs would affect the first three items the last two are unlikely to apply to service dogs (who are usually well cared for and groomed and extraordinarily well trained ... it takes months and years to train service dogs ... they are not just a pet and do not act like one)
 
In this world we're all guilty of something and a group of people ready to lynch you for it.
 
Although some service dogs would affect the first three items the last two are unlikely to apply to service dogs (who are usually well cared for and groomed and extraordinarily well trained ... it takes months and years to train service dogs ... they are not just a pet and do not act like one)
And how is uber even supposed to police "real" service dogs from fake ones? If I want a ride with my dog to the park, where it can run around and get muddy, and I can just say its a service dog that alerts to signs of me having a seizure. In reality, its just my stupid dog.

The animals are not required to wear special collars, vests or harnesses. The ADA makes it unlawful to require proof of a disability or identification for the service dog.

So if I say my dog is a service dog, its a service dog. That's the (stupid) law.
 
There's also no requirements for licensing, certification or identification of service dogs, according to the U.S. Department of Justice: http://www.ada.gov/qasrvc.htm

Literally any random mutt grabbed off the street is a service dog the second I call it one, and you can't tell me its not. So lets not pretend the service dogs are in any way certified different. They are just dogs.
 
1) Some people have dog allergies
2) Dogs tend to have long nails and can tear up a leather seat
3) Some dogs shed vast amounts of hair
4) Some dogs sitting down with their bare anus on your upholstery will leave a shit stain
5) Dogs are more likely than your average person to drool all over the place and bark at you.

I sure as hell wouldn't ever allow a dog in my car.

This. I don't have pets, they are disgusting. I don't give a shit if the dog acts as your eyes, saved 3 children from drowning, and bakes a great apple pie - it's not getting in my car.
 
So lets not pretend the service dogs are in any way certified different. They are just dogs.

"Just dogs" that go through a hell of a lot more training and conditioning than a common "mutt" would.

Or do you want to prove us wrong and put on a blindfold and see how well a common "mutt" leads you around compared to a trained service dog? Through a busy intersection perhaps?

Didn't think so.

There IS a world of difference.
 
"Just dogs" that go through a hell of a lot more training and conditioning than a common "mutt" would.

Or do you want to prove us wrong and put on a blindfold and see how well a common "mutt" leads you around compared to a trained service dog? Through a busy intersection perhaps?

Didn't think so.

There IS a world of difference.
I don't think you get what I'm saying.

There's no required training for a "service dog".

There's no certification for a "service dog".

There's no test or specific requirements for a "service dog".

There's no identification for a "service dog".

You cannot ask for anyone to prove their dog is a "service dog" or that they even NEED a service dog and have a disability in any way.

So again, I can go find a random great dane, and say its my service dog. Its now a service dog, because I said so. That's the law, and you can't question me.
 
Uber needs to make policy to ask about these types of things when booking rides so that they can avoid sending drivers that can't/won't accommodate them. When drivers sign up they need to have them fill out a form about what they are willing to accommodate and the capacity of their vehicle (year/make/model should give them that info) and add it to a database. Then Uber could type in the special needs and get a list of drivers to send. Problem solved.
 
How about when a special needs person calls(blind, has dog, disabled has wheelchair) they say that and the company gets them what they need? A taxi that will accept a dog and a vehicle that has a place for a wheelchair?


Whew, I had to think hard to come up with that.....
 
Hah... like someone mentioned... next we'll see lawsuits for fat people who can't get an Uber ride because all the cars in their area can't fit them.

Uber can easily remedy this, I think. Have a setting on Uber that has Driver's needs/ User's needs. Like say, the driver can put in allergic to dogs, and bam, no more dog calls.
 
What if someone has dander allergies? Should someone else's disability trump your disability? That said, if it's actually a blind person I totally would allow it, it's the fuckers with the little kick dogs who have "anxiety" issues (why are you getting into a car with a stranger then) that would be a big FO type of deal.
 
I don't drive for Uber, but there is no way in hell I'm letting a dog, any dog, service animal or other in my car.

Filthy disgusting animals.
 
Hah... like someone mentioned... next we'll see lawsuits for fat people who can't get an Uber ride because all the cars in their area can't fit them.

Uber can easily remedy this, I think. Have a setting on Uber that has Driver's needs/ User's needs. Like say, the driver can put in allergic to dogs, and bam, no more dog calls.

Obesity isn't a protected class yet nor is it considered a legal disability covered by the ADA ... although I suspect you are right that as we get heavier as a nation there will be more pressure to add it to one or both

That said, Uber decided they wanted to play in the public transportation business ... they thought they could work around some of the laws that affected their competitors (presumably to try and get their own advantageous position) ... they are discovering that they were mistaken and that some laws are much more difficult to ignore than others (they should be able to successfully dodge employment laws by claiming their people are not employees ... equal access laws are tougher to avoid, as they discovered) ... the ADA, for the most part, is actually a good law and I don't see this as a deal breaker for them to figure out (there are certainly some people who abuse the ADA rules but most people who are covered by it are conscientious people and just want the same reasonable access to goods and services that everyone has)
 
What if someone has dander allergies? Should someone else's disability trump your disability? That said, if it's actually a blind person I totally would allow it, it's the fuckers with the little kick dogs who have "anxiety" issues (why are you getting into a car with a stranger then) that would be a big FO type of deal.

I'm pretty sure that an allergy to dander is not currently classified as a disability ... however, Uber could easily allow their driver profiles to indicate their acceptance of animals ... they don't need every driver to accept animals to meet the ADA requirements, just enough so that they can offer reasonable services to ADA qualified passengers ;)
 
Uber could easily allow their driver profiles to indicate their acceptance of animals ... they don't need every driver to accept animals to meet the ADA requirements, just enough so that they can offer reasonable services to ADA qualified passengers ;)

I think this is the best solution. Anyone who needs to bring along a pet for whatever reason will search for a driver that allows it.

It is not right to force every driver to be ok with pet.
 
1) Some people have dog allergies
2) Dogs tend to have long nails and can tear up a leather seat
3) Some dogs shed vast amounts of hair
4) Some dogs sitting down with their bare anus on your upholstery will leave a shit stain
5) Dogs are more likely than your average person to drool all over the place and bark at you.

I sure as hell wouldn't ever allow a dog in my car.

While a couple are valid, the last two have caveots. A person with a service animal is responsible for all damages the animal causes. I would think shit stain would qualify. Service dogs that bark and cannot be brought under control can also be barred from a faculty/service.

With that said, the law is the law...no matter how you feel about it. Uber and their drivers care clearly breaking it. Don't want dogs in your car? Don't drive for Uber.
 
I think this is the best solution. Anyone who needs to bring along a pet for whatever reason will search for a driver that allows it.

It is not right to force every driver to be ok with pet.

Service animals are not "pets"...and it's against the law for ordinary taxi drivers to refuse service animals. Uber does not get a special pass here.
 
Service animals are not "pets"...and it's against the law for ordinary taxi drivers to refuse service animals. Uber does not get a special pass here.
I hope they do get a pass.
There are a lot of people who don't want to smell like dog, have hair of dog on them, and might be allergic to dog. If people don't like it then they can go someplace else.
Or call them the wahhhhhbulance!!!
 
Back
Top