Hacker News Reader

Comment by viscanti | Hacker News Reader

The issue isn't that Uber is discriminating. In fact, the subject of the article was a twice weekly user of Uber for two years. A single driver didn't think the wheelchair would fit in the car. It seems like something that should be reported, and the driver should be dealt with. To take an issue that happens less than 1% of the time and make it sound like it's UBER is a bit absurd.

View on HN

No, it happened twice to her in two weeks.

The question is, does Uber have training in place on what rights a disabled passenger has? Do they discipline or dismiss drivers who receive disability complaints?

It sounds like Uber's response has been that it has no duty to support or enforce the ADA.

Uber is forcing taxis out of business. One of the reasons that taxis are regulated is that they are bound by law to transport the disabled. If we are going to let Uber put them out of business, then we have to aggressively protect the rights of the disabled.

Taxis are regulated primarily because they do business on public streets. If the only way to get a taxi were to call them up, there'd be far less of a reason to regulate them.

Can you explain why that would be?

In any case, in many locales it's almost entirely unheard of to street-hail a taxi. To name two places I've lived, in Boston and Silicon Valley, you always need to call for a taxi, unless you happen to be staying at a hotel in a downtown area.

If taxis do not generally pick up people from the street, then they should not be forced to conform with special regulations designed for taxis that pick up the public on the street.

However, they should additionally be barred from picking up clients on the street.

Do you mean to say that it's okay for private operators to discrimate based on whether their potential client is disabled or not (when it has nothing to do with the safety of the client or the driver)?

You're using discriminate in an odd way. Is it discrimination to not set yourself up to be able to provide service for someone because of an additional cost?

Easy solution: Put a big button on the app "Report ADA violation"

That part of the story is just an example. The point of the story is the argument Uber is using in the lawsuit. Uber maintains it's not a taxi service and therefore not responsible for the drivers actions or the accessibility of the vehicle. Additionally, suggesting that this is a 1% problem like it's a minor edge case bug is outrageously insensitive. This problem impacts real people.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com