Does an uber driver know when they accept a ride that the rider has a dog with them?
https://www.adalive.org/episode5_qas#14
> Service animals are always permitted to accompany their users in any private or public transportation vehicle or facility. This means that they must be allowed to ride with the person with a disability.
> One of the most common misunderstandings about service animals is that they are limited to being guide dogs for persons with visual impairments. But dogs used as service animals are trained to assist people with a wide variety of disabilities, including individuals with hearing and mobility impairments.
> One more thing: charging extra fees to carry a service animal and an individual with a disability would also be a violation of the ADA.
---
https://www.transit.dot.gov/what-americans-disabilities-act-...
> DOT ADA regulation 49 C.F.R. Section 37.167(d) requires transit entities to permit service animals to accompany individuals with disabilities in vehicles and facilities.
The cited part is https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/37.167
That section reads:
> (d) The entity shall permit service animals to accompany individuals with disabilities in vehicles and facilities.
They can have a fleet of vehicles with a mix of accommodations ranging from none to fully equipped for everything, as long as when a disabled person calls for a ride the company can send a vehicle, about as promptly as they can send a vehicle to a non-disabled person, that can handle that person's needs.
So if we were talking about a normal taxi company, that is one that acknowledges that they are a taxi company, then it would make sense for the company to ask when someone calls for a pickup if they have any particular requirements for the vehicle sent or will need any assistance from the driver. Then they could dispatch an appropriate vehicle.
It would also make sense to tell the driver, since sometimes there is extra work or preparation the driver has to do or special handling of the pickup or drop off.
With a taxi company like Uber that is pretending it is not a taxi company, it is a more difficult situation. If they just keep on as is, they will have more and more cases like the present case.
I only see a couple of approaches Uber can take if they don't want this to keep happening and they want to continue pretending they aren't a taxi company.
1. Only allow drivers to use Uber if they and their cars are able to handle all disabilities at all times they they are in service.
2. Allow a mix of drivers/cars like the normal taxi companies have. Users can specify what they need and Uber only shows the ride request to drivers that can handle it.
Should they tell drivers that a ride involves a disabled person? That would aid the driver who goes to handle the ride for the same reasons given earlier for normal taxis. On the other hand, it might lead to drivers giving preference to non-disabled requests, and so still land Uber in hot water. Maybe not tell the driver until after a driver has accepted the ride, with heavy penalties for cancelling after they find out?
They could also just continue as is, except offering early settlements with any disabled person who can't get service rather than trying to fight it and running the cost way up when they lose. That might be financially sensible in the short run, but it bolsters the argument that they undercut normal taxis by skimping on compliance with the law, which strengthens the case for cities to regulate them as heavily as taxis are regulated.
Note however that this dealt with severe allergies -- the sort which would need to be accommodated by any other employer.
https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html
> Q26. When might a service dog's presence fundamentally alter the nature of a service or program provided to the public? A. In most settings, the presence of a service animal will not result in a fundamental alteration. However, there are some exceptions. For example, at a boarding school, service animals could be restricted from a specific area of a dormitory reserved specifically for students with allergies to dog dander. At a zoo, service animals can be restricted from areas where the animals on display are the natural prey or natural predators of dogs, where the presence of a dog would be disruptive, causing the displayed animals to behave aggressively or become agitated. They cannot be restricted from other areas of the zoo.
Edit: also,
https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm
> Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals. When a person who is allergic to dog dander and a person who uses a service animal must spend time in the same room or facility, for example, in a school classroom or at a homeless shelter, they both should be accommodated by assigning them, if possible, to different locations within the room or different rooms in the facility.
https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html
Q22. Can service animals be any breed of dog?
A. Yes. The ADA does not restrict the type of dog breeds that can be service animals.
If Uber drivers are independent service providers to the passenger matched through a matchmaking service, and the law prohibits discrimination against people with service animals, they probably are not.
Different jurisdictions (even within the US) may treat Uber drivers differently resulting in different results.
ADA applies to employers for their employees disabilities, and providers of goods and services for their customers disabilities.
In a jurisdiction where Uber is a provider, the driver is an employee, and the passenger is an Uber customer it may well apply differently than in a jurisdiction where Uber is a third-party-matchmaker-service, the driver is a provider of service to the passenger, and the passenger is a customer of the driver that locates and pays the driver through Uber services.
If the driver isn't willing to comply with the regulations, then they shouldn't broadcast their services on Uber.
An individual driver is not required to. If that particular driver can't, Uber still has to provide that service for the passenger.
Instead, the ADA says that companies must make reasonable accomodations for the employee.
In this case, it means drivers with allergies don't have to take animals in their cars.
For someone with a back injury, it might mean they can stock shelves so long as items are kept under a certain weight.
There are plenty of instances of people with disabilities not having to do the full job, because they can do most of the job.