# Service animals



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


----------



## EcoboostMKS (Nov 6, 2015)

This has been discussed ad nauseam here. Lots of threads with lots of opinions, just do a search. In short, allergies are not protected by the ADA, so you are required by law to pick up legitimate service animals. At best, you can be deactivated if you are reported for denying a ride. At worst, there can be legal repercussions.

If your allergies really are that severe where you can end up in the hospital and you're not just doing this so you don't get dog hair in your car, I'd do your best to accommodate the rider. Explain your situation, apologize, have them request another car and volunteer to stay with them until another driver shows up for them. This may stop them from reporting you.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

Thanks for the reply. It's appreciated. I will have to read around for those posts.

Yes my allergies are that bad that I have been admitted or sent to the ER for a breathing treatment. I absolutely would have no choice but to refuse the rider. It doesn't take but 5 minutes for me to have a reaction and then the dog hair that will remain in the car to keep triggering my reaction. I was thinking the same that I would wait with the rider till someone else came along. There should be something that protects people like us just like there is a law to protect people with service animals. It only makes sense. I'm not trying to hop on the "im discriminated" bus here but this is kinda discriminating if you ask me.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

From my understanding, it's only the law in California. A strict reading of the Federal ADA law only applies to public transportation. But I'm not a lawyer, just giving out lawyery advice on a forum.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

agtg said:


> From my understanding, it's only the law in California. A strict reading of the Federal ADA law only applies to public transportation. But I'm not a lawyer, just giving out lawyery advice on a forum.


Ohh I'll have to really do my research then. I only ask because of the email that I just got from Uber. I could be jumping the gun here! lol thanks for the heads up!


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

BostonC said:


> Ohh I'll have to really do my research then. I only ask because of the email that I just got from Uber. I could be jumping the gun here! lol thanks for the heads up!


There is a thread around here that discusses it. It's called "A Pitbull on a Pool Trip." There's a link in there to the federal law.

The only reason why it's a law in Cali is because Cali Uber drivers are regulated by a special state entity which forces the drivers to abide by it. Outside of Cali, you're probably a lot freer and happier in general.


----------



## EcoboostMKS (Nov 6, 2015)

agtg said:


> From my understanding, it's only the law in California. A strict reading of the Federal ADA law only applies to public transportation. But I'm not a lawyer, just giving out lawyery advice on a forum.


If the laws apply to taxi drivers (and they do), they apply to uber drivers too. Not that your tax status has anything to do with ADA laws, but taxi drivers are independent contractors too if you want to go with that angle.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

EcoboostMKS said:


> If the laws apply to taxi drivers (and they do), they apply to uber drivers too. Not that your tax status has anything to do with ADA laws, but taxi drivers are independent contractors too if you want to go with that angle.


The key word in the law is "public transportation." Livery is a state regulated industry. Rideshare is not in most states.


----------



## EcoboostMKS (Nov 6, 2015)

agtg said:


> The key word in the law is "public transportation." Livery is a state regulated industry. Rideshare is not in most states.


Uber is open to the public. Anyone can log on and request a ride. It's not closed to private membership. It's as public of transportation as the bus and legitimate taxis regardless if the state approves your fingerprints or if you're required to get commercial insurance or not.

Nothing against you, but i've done this in circles a few times before with people trying to get around this any way they can. I really don't feel like doing this again. If you want to deny service to a legitimate service animal, that's your prerogative, but be prepared for the possible consequences from both uber and the law.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Do they carry around a certificate or license to verify that its a real service aninal?


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

EcoboostMKS said:


> Uber is open to the public. Anyone can log on and request a ride. It's not closed to private membership. It's as public of transportation as the bus and legitimate taxis regardless if the state approves your fingerprints or if you're required to get commercial insurance or not.
> 
> Nothing against you, but i've done this in circles a few times before with people trying to get around this any way they can. I really don't feel like doing this again. If you want to deny service to a legitimate service animal, that's your prerogative, but be prepared for the possible consequences from both uber and the law.


You didn't have to reply but I appreciate that you did. I'm new here so still learning how to navigate around.

I would have no choice but to refuse the rider. I would fight tooth and nail and have plenty of medical documentation to prove my sickness. So that alone would keep me from suffering any consequences.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

EcoboostMKS said:


> Uber is open to the public. Anyone can log on and request a ride. It's not closed to private membership. It's as public of transportation as the bus and legitimate taxis regardless if the state approves your fingerprints or if you're required to get commercial insurance or not.
> 
> Nothing against you, but i've done this in circles a few times before with people trying to get around this any way they can. I really don't feel like doing this again. If you want to deny service to a legitimate service animal, that's your prerogative, but be prepared for the possible consequences from both uber and the law.


I won't go in circles with you. There law is clear, and rideshare is most certainly private.

One thing is for sure: Uber shills this forum hard to control perception of this law for its drivers because it suits their desires to yoke the driver and shirk the rider who may not be pleased with the fact that drivers don't have to take their animal in their personal, private vehicle for a rideshare drive.


----------



## EcoboostMKS (Nov 6, 2015)

BostonC said:


> You didn't have to reply but I appreciate that you did. I'm new here so still learning how to navigate around.
> 
> I would have no choice but to refuse the rider. I would fight tooth and nail and have plenty of medical documentation to prove my sickness. So that alone would keep me from suffering any consequences.


Like I said, if you're being genuine and you seem like you are, explain your situation and apologize. Hopefully the rider understands and doesn't report you.

There are two specific questions you can ask to verify if the dog is really a service animal. You can find them on the ADA website. Documentation or a vest is not required for a dog, so don't be surprised if the dog doesn't have any and someone still says it's a service animal.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Sorry you are allergic to Cujo.
Service dogs are part of the job.
Perhaps Uber should inquire about allergies as part of the screening process ?


----------



## EcoboostMKS (Nov 6, 2015)

agtg said:


> One thing is for sure: Uber shills this forum hard to control perception of this law for its drivers because it suits their desires to yoke the driver and shirk the rider who may not be pleased with the fact that drivers don't have to take their animal in their personal, private vehicle for a rideshare drive.


If you're referring to me, all you have to do is look at my previous posts. I'm definitely not an uber shill. I can't stand the company.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

BostonC said:


> You didn't have to reply but I appreciate that you did. I'm new here so still learning how to navigate around.
> 
> I would have no choice but to refuse the rider. I would fight tooth and nail and have plenty of medical documentation to prove my sickness. So that alone would keep me from suffering any consequences.


I'm allergic to animal fur, too. It's funny how people casually presume one person's right should unfairly over-ride another person's right in a case.

It's really absurd. So a person who claims they have some anxiety disorder goes to a doctor and the doctor agrees that a pet would help ease their anxiety. This person can now take this pet everywhere because of this medical accommodation.

Well what if they encounter another person who went to their doctor because they get anxiety from being around large, fanged creatures within close proximity.

Both have a medical accommodation, but whose accommodation reigns supreme?

It's quite absurd. In general, despite my allergy to animals, there is no reason why I should be forced to allow a pitbull sit behind me while I'm driving down the road, nevermind the hair and possible mess that can come from capitulating to such a request.

What they should do is like what they do with people with physcial disabilities and create a class of driver who is equipped, willing, and compensated for such accommodations.

That may make too much sense in this, though, as the law for pets of this nature is so obviously abused by manipulative people who just want to take their animal wherever they go in the city.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

And that's the last I will say on this matter. For more, go read my poem "A Pitbull on a Pool Trip" in the aforementioned thread.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

BostonC said:


> I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


No you don't


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

The answer is simple. Per the terms of service, you never have to give a ride you choose not to. Simply drive past and cancel. The lag in the rider app means you can be gone and canceled before they even expect you to arrive. Just be prepared to claim suspicious characters watching you or something if they ask, which they won't. I've never carried an animal and probably never will.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

agtg said:


> From my understanding, it's only the law in California. A strict reading of the Federal ADA law only applies to public transportation. But I'm not a lawyer, just giving out lawyery advice on a forum.


For the love of God are you still that confused by this. The ADA is the authority here. It's a federal law. Dude in Florida was arrested for his violation. Also, for running over a blind person but I digress. He made all the same dumb points. Best of luck to you


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> For the love of God are you still that confused by this. The ADA is the authority here. It's a federal law. Dude in Florida was arrested for his violation. Also, for running over a blind person but I digress. He made all the same dumb points. Best of luck to you


I don't consult ducks on laws.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> Do they carry around a certificate or license to verify that its a real service aninal?


Under ADA there is no requirement for any certificate, special tag, vest, or license, (all available on the Internet,) rendering them meaningless.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

BostonC said:


> Ohh I'll have to really do my research then. I only ask because of the email that I just got from Uber. I could be jumping the gun here!


Trust and understand this. agtg has not even the slightest clue what he's talking about. It is federal law. You can not refuse the ride due to a service animal. RamzFanz has the right idea, even if his heart is in a dark desolate place. You can refuse the ride for all sorts of reasons but the worst thing, the WORST thing, pay attention lady, THE WORST THING you can do is what you suggested, be nice and understanding and tell the passenger it's because my allergies blah blah blah. You'll go to court and you'll lose. If you say it's because you're allergic it's going to sound to the judge and jury and me like you're saying it's because the dog and that's not an option.

Cancel if you don't like dogs. Fine. You'd better have a better reason than that and you'd better stick to your story because the ADA is strictly enforced and often times abused in this country and you do not want to be on the business end of the consequences of taking agtg's terrible advice


----------



## Robertk (Jun 8, 2015)

personally I think we are way, way beyond reasonable accommodation. There are stories of dogs, cats, pigs, and miniature horses allowed on airplanes!


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

Robertk said:


> personally I think we are way, way beyond reasonable accommodation. There are stories of dogs, cats, pigs, and miniature horses allowed on airplanes!


Dogs and miniature horses are for our purposes the only animals that can qualify as service animals. Obviously miniature horses aren't going to be an issue so really it's only dogs. Cats, parrots, iguanas, etc may be companion animals but they're not service animals.


----------



## Tenzo (Jan 25, 2016)

If the person claims it's a service animal you must treat it as such.

The ONLY questions you can ask are;
1) Is it your service animal
2) Is it performing it's service now

It is a federal law that you may not discriminate against people with disabilities. Period.
Planes, trains, automobiles, stores, restaurants, schools, parks, its doesn't make any difference. If someone is trying to tell you it's only in a certain industry they are wrong and most likely lying to you on purpose.


----------



## UberUpYours! (Sep 28, 2016)

Just "drop" your phone. The battery pops out, problem solved. Also if you have dog allergies as severe as you say, maybe you just can't drive for Uber? What if I am covered in dog hair and get in your car? Is all this worth it? No. No its not.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

UberUpYours! said:


> Just "drop" your phone. The battery pops out, problem solved. Also if you have dog allergies as severe as you say, maybe you just can't drive for Uber? What if I am covered in dog hair and get in your car? Is all this worth it? No. No its not.


She's not that allergic to dogs. Anybody with a dog has dog hair on them. When they get in your car, you know the rest.


----------



## Tenzo (Jan 25, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> Dogs and miniature horses are for our purposes the only animals that can qualify as service animals. Obviously miniature horses aren't going to be an issue so really it's only dogs. Cats, parrots, iguanas, etc may be companion animals but they're not service animals.


Dueling ADA cites: https://www.ada.gov/archive/qasrvc.htm

The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or *other animal individually trained to provide assistance* to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

BTW agtg, from the ada dot GOV website...

_Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals. _


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

I just heard on the radio today that airlines are meeting today with government officials, don't remember which ones, to narrow down definition to only miniature horses and dogs.


----------



## Tenzo (Jan 25, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


We have the OPs answer in that cite:
"Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals. "


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> BTW agtg, from the ada dot GOV website...
> 
> _Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals. _


Rideshare is an unregulated, private enterprise. The ADA law applies to "public transportation." If your state has regulated Uber to define it as such, and California has, so be it. In most states rideshare is unregulated private enterprise.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

observer said:


> I just heard on the radio today that airlines are meeting today with government officials, don't remember which ones, to narrow down definition to only miniature horses and dogs.


The trouble is there's a lot of different definitions. The federal housing authority has different definitions of service animals, the FAA has their own as well.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

agtg said:


> Rideshare is an unregulated, private enterprise. The ADA law applies to "public transportation." If your state has regulated Uber to define it as such, and California has, so be it. In most states rideshare is unregulated private enterprise.


Your head is as hard as the granite of El Capitan


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

observer said:


> I just heard on the radio today that airlines are meeting today with government officials, don't remember which ones, to narrow down definition to only miniature horses and dogs.


What about an alligator? Perhaps we need an investigator. A crocodile may help keep down the bile. A chimpanzee could make one feel free. It's alright for you, but not for me?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...herapy-animals-planes-20160926-htmlstory.html

not with govt but with advocacy groups.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

If a person with a service dog is hit by a car the ambulance is required to take that animal with the patient. When they get to the hospital the dog stays in the emergency room with the handler. If the patient is admitted, the dog stays in the hospital.

Oh, but UberDrivers are exempt. I don't think so.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

Again, from the ada.gov website...

_A service animal may not be excluded based on assumptions or stereotypes about the animal's breed or how the animal might behave._

So much for the "but it's a pit bull!" defense


----------



## Tenzo (Jan 25, 2016)

agtg said:


> Rideshare is an unregulated, private enterprise. The ADA law applies to "public transportation.".


No, no it doesn't. Are restaurants 'public transportation' ?
We have both shown cites for our statements. You have not.

Also, if you think rideshare is unregulated, you dont drive for Uber and are simple a Troll

Why are you lying to the OP?


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

observer said:


> I just heard on the radio today that airlines are meeting today with government officials, don't remember which ones, to narrow down definition to only miniature horses and dogs.


*
Q37. Do commercial airlines have to comply with the ADA?

A*. No. The Air Carrier Access Act is the Federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities in air travel.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

Tenzo said:


> Why are you lying to the OP?


I don't get it either. There are people that get an idea in their head and nothing else makes sense to them. "But I'm an independent contractor..." "But it's not fair, my kid is allergic..." was the excuse the UberDriver in Florida used before he was placed UNDER ARREST. Yet all the citations in the world and he's not going to budge.

Decency would dictate not spreading yet another thread of misinformation about this topic because OP just wants information, not some fantasy interpretation of what a UberPeople poster thinks is the law.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

observer said:


> I just heard on the radio today that airlines are meeting today with government officials, don't remember which ones, to narrow down definition to only miniature horses and dogs.


Having just spent too much time reading up on the differences between the ADA and the ACAA and whatever the FHA's law is I can tell you that the complexity of our federal legal code places the nuance of how all these definitions are applied well above the head of the average (myself included) UberDriver. However since 80% of posters on this forum are ivy league educated lawyers...


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

One thing is even more clear to now though is that under no circumstance can you discriminate against a person because they have a service dog. This is NOT strictly a California thing. It applies throughout the U.S.

OP, the good news is its unlikely you'll run into this problem but if you do, do what you have to do but DO NOT TELL ANYONE you canceled the ride as a result of the dog or your allergies or whatever. Tell them you suddenly developed a case of elbow eye and let them figure it out. I know you want to be a good person but in this case you need to protect yourself because the penalties for running afoul of this law are staggering


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Getting a bit edgy, Tedgey? I'm requesting you stop linking my name when you're trying to troll me into an argument. Thanks

This was all hashed out in the other thread, and no one has been able to prove that Uber drivers outside of California are considered a "public entity."

Californian made a special "public" regulatory agency which oversees Uber drivers, that's why Californians must abide by this law, not because of the federal ADA which plainly states it's only applicable to "public entities."

What is a "public entity" as defined by the federal law itself?

_"Public entity _means-


(1) Any State or local government;
(2) Any department, agency, special purpose district, or other instrumentality of a State or States or local government; and
(3) The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and any commuter authority (as defined in section 103(8) of the Rail Passenger Service Act)."
You don't need to be a lawyer to recognize rideshare drivers are not a public entity.Here is the full text of the federal ADA law:

https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleII_2010/titleII_2010_withbold.htm

And why did they need to make a special law to exclude aviation? BECAUSE FLIGHT IS FEDERALLY REGULATED IN THE UNITED STATES!

https://www.faa.gov/passengers/


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Wait, there's more! According to the federal ADA law...

*"A service animal means any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.* Tasks performed can include, among other things, pulling a wheelchair, retrieving dropped items, alerting a person to a sound, reminding a person to take medication, or pressing an elevator button."

"While Emotional Support Animals or Comfort Animals are often used as part of a medical treatment plan as therapy animals, they are not considered service animals under the ADA."

https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet

I am a law-abiding citizen. I am not interested in defying laws whatsoever. Clearly, the way others have been portraying the law on these forums, they are not only ignorant of the law, many, to my eyes, are willfully mischaracterizing the law for some unscrupulous end that meets Uber's desires.

In short, don't believe the shills on this forum!


----------



## Red Leader (Sep 4, 2016)

Service animals? No....I don't pick up hookers.


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

Hell if they ask in advance, I'll allow NON service animals in the car if they lie on a blanket or something.

Wrap your heads around that.


----------



## darkshy77 (Sep 28, 2015)

BostonC said:


> I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


abc13.com/news/uber-driver-arrested-for-refusing-ride-to-blind-man-with-service-dog/1418235
So what do you do avoid all people..... Most people with pets have hair on them... Pick up or qiut


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Realistically, Being an uber river with a dog allergy isn't going to work, at the end of the day you have to chose between breaking the law an putting yourself at risk. Just like a waitress at a bar can't be super sensitive to tobacco smoke, If you cant ever safely handle a service dog you just have to get out of the job.

Some things to keep in mind is

*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.*
In most circumstances... If customer, client ect enters a facility the person who is allergic to dogs any staff should be relocated to a different area.

The thing people forget is that the rights of the person with a service animal, are always given higher consideration than the rights of people who are allergic to dogs.

Is this fair?
(for the person with the service animal it is)
Is this right?
(for people who are hopelessly dependent on for-hire transportation it is.)
Is this the law?
Yes

Far warning for the OP or anyone else in the same situation, people with disabilities are dependent on us as Rideshare/taxi operators. They don't have any options.

My dog doesn't go everywhere with me, in fact he rarely leaves home. But i'm not dependent on him to safely cross the street either. I have no problem waiting 4-5 times as long for hired car to show up when I'm heading to the airport with him. (I usually have to call the cab 5+ hours before my flight departs to get everything taken care of at both the airport and with the cab company.)[I can tell the cab company up front i need a pet friendly car, and they will acomidate me] Would this be fare to subject a person with disabilities to this kind of service discrimination?

People with pets rarely need to drive their dogs around. People with service animals make such a big deal about it because *we are their only way to get around*.

side note worth mentioning...

If a business such as a hotel normally charges guests for damage that they cause, a customer with a disability may also be charged for damage caused by himself or his service animal.

Uber drivers can charge cleaning fees and damage fees for any incidents that happen with a service animal.


----------



## CrazyT (Jul 2, 2016)

I keep a few towels in the back for animals. I've had a few service animals, both for vision and hearing. They've been very well behaved and when I pull up and realize the pax has one, I just hop out and grab the towels. One for the seat, especially since they may have wet feet, and I grabbed a bigger one yesterday for the pax to dry off her dog a bit since it was POURING.


----------



## oneanother3993 (Sep 8, 2016)

EcoboostMKS said:


> This has been discussed ad nauseam here. Lots of threads with lots of opinions, just do a search. In short, allergies are not protected by the ADA, so you are required by law to pick up legitimate service animals. At best, you can be deactivated if you are reported for denying a ride. At worst, there can be legal repercussions.


They deactivate for cancelling? How strict? I only ask because I've heard people on the forums talking about how they've cancelled because jobs are longer than they expected, some don't like to go to the airport so they cancel and drive off if they see suitcases, etc.

Note: I don't agree with the concept of drivers doing this, but I've heard people talking about them as if they do them as regular procedure.


----------



## spachick (Jun 11, 2016)

I agree with others that you are risking your health because you never know when the next dog-loving pax is going to shed his pet's dander all over your back seat. 
That said, seems like the ADA should be a 2-way street. You should be able to present medical proof of your allergies to the ride share service and the pax should have a ping that's tagged as having a service animal. Then you'd never be paired. 
In the event that a friend is doing the ping, you should have a document to show them to prove that you're not just avoiding the ride. It's in everyone's best interest to not have you going into anaphylactic shock whilst going 70 on the freeway.


----------



## ubercharlie (Sep 14, 2016)

can i end the ride if the service animal sits on the car seat by jumping up from the floor? Service animals are welcome in my bmw.


----------



## spachick (Jun 11, 2016)

ubercharlie said:


> can i end the ride if the service animal sits on the car seat by jumping up from the floor? Service animals are welcome in my bmw.


Probably not. I'd rather have the dog on my leather seats than on the carpeted floor. Easier cleanup.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Tenzo said:


> No, no it doesn't. Are restaurants 'public transportation' ?
> We have both shown cites for our statements. You have not.
> 
> Also, if you think rideshare is unregulated, you dont drive for Uber and are simple a Troll
> ...


Restaurants are most certainly regulated by public entities.They're overseen by the public health departments and require inspections for cleanliness.

Uber is not regulated whatsoever in most states. They do not qualify as a "public entity" in those states. Some states, such as Californi and New York, maybe even Boston, they are regulated. Others they are not. End of story.


----------



## Sergei (May 25, 2016)

Many people will abuse the "service dog" laws for their "compassionate care" animals to get a free ride, without reprimand for leaving a complete mess of dog hair, fleas, and various other dirt, debris and mess.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

I would like to sum my points up once again:

The federal ADA law only applies to public entities, or transportation industries that are regulated by public entities. Any other reading of the law, or its application thereof, is quite suspect in my opinion.

Some states have public entities that regulate Uber, most don't. California, New York City, among other places, regulate Uber and are obviously under the oversight of a "public entitie" thereby defining Uber drivers subject to this law.

Even the states that do regulate Uber through a public entity, it's not a blanket law. The law clearly states it's only for "service" animals and not for "support" animals. "Service" animals must go through specialized training to complete a task that the owner otherwise would not be able to live without. For example: A blind person has a specially trained dog. The federal ADA law was created for such a person. Someone with an anxiety disorder, who draws comfort from having a "support" animal is not covered, and may well be committing a federal crime themselves by pretending that public entities, or anyone, must accommodate them under the federal ADA law. 
I am not a lawyer, and in no way suggest anything you read on the internet (written by me or anyone else) should be your sole advisor related to legal matters. I have, however, made some clear points that must be considered when looking at the federal ADA law. Every one of us has due diligence in such matters and should consult an attorney or their state's municipalities for clarification within their market.

I also encourage everyone to search out these threads on this topic, and notice how hard certain personalities react to such an issue. You may find consistent, and unsupported, arguments that would shape the perception of this law and how it applies to Uber drivers across the nation. It's a lot like using a sledgehammer to apply mayonnaise to your favorite sandwic: Inaccurate and messy.

And with that, I bid you adieu! Until the next "Service Animal" thread where we can rehash all the same points all over again!


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

agtg said:


> Service" animals must go through specialized training to complete a task that the owner otherwise would not be able to live without.


I believe it says somewhere in the ADA regulations that no formal training is required; that the disabled person can train the dog. Do you feel that would be "specialized" training?
Otherwise, I applaud your well laid out piece. I think there is a lot of abuse of the intent of the ADA by people using it to take their "comfort" dogs where they wouldn't otherwise be allowed.
Whenever I see one of those vests I wonder if it is there because the person feels guilty.


----------



## Lyle (Nov 11, 2015)

Many times if you see a lower rider rating it is because of an animal service or otherwise. Just don't accept riders with low ratings,


----------



## Tr4vis Ka1anick (Oct 2, 2016)

You need to buy an animal crate with proper ventilation, put it in your modified trunk which with the require air holes as well.

Doesn't anyone read the Terms of Service anymore?

I have a helper monkey and get rides all the time.

Uber on!


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

BostonC said:


> I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


So your allergy is so bad you can end up in the hospital? What about all the people with animals that have that animals hair on them they get into your car do your allergies not "go off" then? Just curious how that severe of an allergy is managed.


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

BostonC said:


> Thanks for the reply. It's appreciated. I will have to read around for those posts.
> 
> Yes my allergies are that bad that I have been admitted or sent to the ER for a breathing treatment. I absolutely would have no choice but to refuse the rider. It doesn't take but 5 minutes for me to have a reaction and then the dog hair that will remain in the car to keep triggering my reaction. I was thinking the same that I would wait with the rider till someone else came along. There should be something that protects people like us just like there is a law to protect people with service animals. It only makes sense. I'm not trying to hop on the "im discriminated" bus here but this is kinda discriminating if you ask me.


Well if you can get the state you live in to decalre you disabled by your allergy then you could get some laws passed. I suggest you go live in a plastic bubble free of all animal hair instead of being a driver. Many many ppl have animals and they get into your car covered in animal hair. Surely you cannot have these ppl in your car either due to your severe allergies. What would make you want to work with ppl who are covered in your allergen? Just curious why you would choose such a job.


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> Do they carry around a certificate or license to verify that its a real service aninal?


They are not legally required to carry a certificate around. ADA is a federal law. ADA laws trump ppl with allergies. BTW alot of service animals are hypo-allergenic so they will not bother ppl with allergies. But wont do anything for dog haters.


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

BostonC said:


> You didn't have to reply but I appreciate that you did. I'm new here so still learning how to navigate around.
> 
> I would have no choice but to refuse the rider. I would fight tooth and nail and have plenty of medical documentation to prove my sickness. So that alone would keep me from suffering any consequences.


actually you could still get sued. and lose your uber job. Most service animals are hypo-allergenic like mine, so your severe sickness would not be affected. Unless you just dont like animals and that is your reason to deny a service animal. Either way still curious as to why you would choose such a dangerous job. Given your severe sickness.


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> Sorry you are allergic to Cujo.
> Service dogs are part of the job.
> Perhaps Uber should inquire about allergies as part of the screening process ?


lol


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

First of all emotional support animals are not service animals cannot be service animals. So when you see a service animal its not for "emotional" problems. Second, I personally had to get cancer to be able to have a service dog. I have severe allergies to diff chemicals, additives , preservatives and bug stings. Severe meaning life threatening need an epipen or I could die. So I need an allergy alert service animal to make sure I dont die. I had to pay over $16,000 to have my dog trained. So I think i deserve to be treated with respect instead of contempt and ridicule and assume I have "emotional" problems just because I NEED a service dog.  My dog comes with me to work with Lyft and Uber. And believe me I get plenty of BS from pax.


----------



## peppersmommy (Oct 2, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> She's not that allergic to dogs. Anybody with a dog has dog hair on them. When they get in your car, you know the rest.


Thankyou! My service is hypo-allergenic, I still get pax who say I'm allergic to dogs! I explain that my dog is hypo-allergenic and wont bother your allergies and they will still "pretend" to be allergic and "suffering" and its all because they dont like dogs and they are tyand tooo selfish and lazy to order another car. They will still get into mine knowing there is a dog and try to get me in trouble with uber or lyft and give me a bad rating. Or they will badger me why i need a service dog. Demand to know why I need it and what my disability is. PPl are jerks and just hate animals sometimes. Even perfectly nice well behaved service animals.


----------



## Ubermchenry (Jul 5, 2016)

The one way you can tell if it is a service dog it will not jump on the set a service dog will lay on the floor or in between the lags of owener


----------



## sekani (Jan 15, 2015)

Posting this for agtg since he or she is confused by the "public entity" thing. You've been focusing on Title II of the ADA act, which only covers government agencies. You are correct in that Title II does NOT apply to rideshare drivers as they are not a public entity as defined by the ADA.

However, there's also a *Title III of the ADA* that applies specifically to private enterprises, and specifically as well to privately-owned vessels used for transporting people. From the introductory section:

Under this regulation, the Department of Justice covers passenger vessels operated by private entities not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people with respect to the provision of goods and services of a public accommodation on the vessel. For example, a vessel operator whose vessel departs from Point A, takes passengers on a recreational trip, and returns passengers to Point A without ever providing for disembarkation at a Point B (_e.g., _a dinner or harbor cruise, a fishing charter) is a public accommodation operated by a private entity not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people. This regulation covers those aspects of the vessel's operation relating to the use and enjoyment of the public accommodation, including, for example, the boarding process, safety policies, accessible routes on the vessel, and the provision of effective communication. Persons with complaints or concerns about discrimination on the basis of disability by vessel operators who are private entities not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people, or questions about how this regulation applies to such operators and vessels, should contact the Department of Justice.

Vessels operated by private entities primarily engaged in the business of transporting people and that provide the goods and services of a public accommodation are covered by this regulation and the Department of Transportation's passenger vessel rule, 49 CFR part 39. A vessel operator whose vessel takes passengers from Point A to Point B (_e.g., _a cruise ship that sails from Miami to one or more Caribbean islands, a private ferry boat between two points on either side of a river or bay, a water taxi between two points in an urban area) is most likely a private entity primarily engaged in the business of transporting people. Persons with questions about how this regulation applies to such operators and vessels may contact the Department of Justice or the Department of Transportation for guidance or further information. However, the Department of Justice has enforcement authority for all private entities under title III of the ADA, so individuals with complaints about noncompliance with part 39 should provide those complaints to the Department of Justice.

The provisions of this rule and 49 CFR part 39 are intended to be substantively consistent with one another. Consequently, in interpreting the application of this rule to vessel operators who are private entities not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people, the Department of Justice views the obligations of those vessel operators as being similar to those of private entities primarily engaged in the business of transporting people under the provisions of 49 CFR part 39.
​Also:

*Section 36.310 Transportation Provided by Public Accommodations*
Section 36.310 contains specific provisions relating to public accommodations that provide transportation to their clients or customers. This section has been substantially revised in order to coordinate the requirements of this section with the requirements applicable to these transportation systems that will be contained in the regulations issued by the Secretary of Transportation pursuant to section 306 of the ADA, to be codified at 49 CFR part 37. The Department notes that, although the responsibility for issuing regulations applicable to transportation systems operated by public accommodations is divided between this Department and the Department of - Transportation, enforcement authority is assigned only to the Department of Justice.

The Department received relatively few comments on this section of the proposed rule. Most of the comments addressed issues that are not specifically addressed in this part, such as the standards for accessible vehicles and the procedure for determining whether equivalent service is provided. Those standards will be contained in the regulation issued by the Department of Transportation. Other commenters raised questions about the types of transportation that will be subject to this section. In response to these inquiries, the Department has revised the list of examples contained in the regulation.

Paragraph (a)(1) states the general rule that covered public accommodations are subject to all of the specific provisions of subparts B, C, and D, except as provided in Sec.36.310. Examples of operations covered by the requirements are listed in paragraph (a)(2). The stated examples include hotel and motel airport shuttle services, customer shuttle bus services operated by private companies and shopping centers, student transportation, and shuttle operations of recreational facilities such as stadiums, zoos, amusement parks, and ski resorts. This brief list is not exhaustive. The section applies to any fixed route or demand responsive transportation system operated by a public accommodation for the benefit of its clients or customers. The section does not apply to transportation services provided only to employees. Employee transportation will be subject to the regulations issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to implement title I of the Act. However, if employees and customers or clients are served by the same transportation system, the provisions of this section will apply.

Paragraph (b) specifically provides that a public accommodation shall remove transportation barriers in existing vehicles to the extent that it is readily achievable to do so, but that the installation of hydraulic or other lifts is not required.

Paragraph (c) provides that public accommodations subject to this section shall comply with the requirements for transportation vehicles and systems contained in the regulations issued by the Secretary of Transportation.
​View the text for yourself here: https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleIII_2010/titleIII_2010_regulations.htm

However, if you still don't believe the law applies to you for some reason... Uber really doesn't care cause they'll deactivate you anyway according to their terms of service. Good luck.
​


----------



## Tr4vis Ka1anick (Oct 2, 2016)

I have a service King Cobra.

Here is a picture of my Cobra trainer, Rupie.










Here is my good friend Melisa with hers, just before getting into an Uber.










It doesn't bite. Just don't make any sudden moves.


----------



## Dan The Lyft Man (Dec 25, 2015)

You guys have to remember the term "Service Dog" doesn't apply to just dogs that are specially trained to be service animals. I work at the VA hospital in West Roxbury. This has come up because we had a service dog barked at a trained service dog which didn't bark back. Owners of the trained service dog complained, saying that wasn't a trained service animal and it had to leave the hospital. For about one month the hospital didn't allow non-trained service dogs. They reverse it's decision, since Veterans suffering from PTSD receive dogs and other animals as companion service dogs. So All animals were welcomed to the hospital. Some people think that dogs like that should stay home, but a Veteran might have a difficult moment and need his animal at anytime. So this is why they are allowed at the VA in Boston. So keep this in mind when picking up people.


----------



## censoredbytheFCC (Jun 25, 2016)

BostonC said:


> I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


As an independent contractor, you aren't required to take a ride you don't feel comfortable with. Uber cannot deactivate you for this purpose.

However, the taxi commission/regulatory agency that licenses drivers and vehicles to operate for ride-sharing apps can impose severe penalties for denying a service animal. Here in New York City, the fine is $5000 for refusal of service animal, and TLC takes away your taxi license for 3 years. I really don't know the regulation at all for your city so you may need to google them or look on the TNC website or whatever.

Nothing against you but you shouldn't be in the taxi industry if you're allergic. In fact, you would be denied a taxi license in NYC in your case.


----------



## jester121 (Sep 6, 2016)

sekani said:


> However, there's also a *Title III of the ADA* that applies specifically to private enterprises, and specifically as well to privately-owned vessels used for transporting people. From the introductory section:
> 
> Under this regulation, the Department of Justice covers passenger vessels operated by private entities not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people with respect to the provision of goods and services of a public accommodation on the vessel. For example, a vessel operator whose vessel departs from Point A, takes passengers on a recreational trip, and returns passengers to Point A without ever providing for disembarkation at a Point B (_e.g., _a dinner or harbor cruise, a fishing charter) is a public accommodation operated by a private entity not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people. This regulation covers those aspects of the vessel's operation relating to the use and enjoyment of the public accommodation, including, for example, the boarding process, safety policies, accessible routes on the vessel, and the provision of effective communication. Persons with complaints or concerns about discrimination on the basis of disability by vessel operators who are private entities not primarily engaged in the business of transporting people, or questions about how this regulation applies to such operators and vessels, should contact the Department of Justice.
> ......​


You know that "vessel" = boat, right? Not car.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Older Chauffeur said:


> I believe it says somewhere in the ADA regulations that no formal training is required; that the disabled person can train the dog. Do you feel that would be "specialized" training?
> Otherwise, I applaud your well laid out piece. I think there is a lot of abuse of the intent of the ADA by people using it to take their "comfort" dogs where they wouldn't otherwise be allowed.
> Whenever I see one of those vests I wonder if it is there because the person feels guilty.


Actually, the ADA specifically states the animal must have specialized service training if they are to qualify for protection under the law. Other animals, trained or not by owners, do not qualify.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Tr4vis Ka1anick said:


> I have a service King Cobra.
> 
> Here is a picture of my Cobra trainer, Rupie.
> 
> ...


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

agtg said:


> Actually, the ADA specifically states the animal must have specialized service training if they are to qualify for protection under the law. Other animals, trained or not by owners, do not qualify.


This is what I was going by- see *Q5* below.
*DEFINITION OF A SERVICE ANIMAL*
*Q1. What is a service animal?*

*A*. Under the ADA, a service animal is defined as a dog that has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability. The task(s) performed by the dog must be directly related to the person's disability.

*Q2. What does "do work or perform tasks" mean?*

*A*. The dog must be trained to take a specific action when needed to assist the person with a disability. For example, a person with diabetes may have a dog that is trained to alert him when his blood sugar reaches high or low levels. A person with depression may have a dog that is trained to remind her to take her medication. Or, a person who has epilepsy may have a dog that is trained to detect the onset of a seizure and then help the person remain safe during the seizure.

*Q3. Are emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals considered service animals under the ADA?
A*. No. These terms are used to describe animals that provide comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA. However, some State or local governments have laws that allow people to take emotional support animals into public places. You may check with your State and local government agencies to find out about these laws.

*Q4. If someone's dog calms them when having an anxiety attack, does this qualify it as a service animal?*

*A*. It depends. The ADA makes a distinction between psychiatric service animals and emotional support animals. If the dog has been trained to sense that an anxiety attack is about to happen and take a specific action to help avoid the attack or lessen its impact, that would qualify as a service animal. However, if the dog's mere presence provides comfort, that would not be considered a service animal under the ADA.

*Q5. Does the ADA require service animals to be professionally trained?*

*A*. No. People with disabilities have the right to train the dog themselves and are not required to use a professional service dog training program.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Older Chauffeur said:


> This is what I was going by- see Q5 below.
> *DEFINITION OF A SERVICE ANIMAL*
> *Q1. What is a service animal?*
> 
> ...


That source is incorrect. Where is this from? Where is the link? Is it a blog post?


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

agtg said:


> That source is incorrect. Where is this from? Where is the link? Is it a blog post?


https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

censoredbytheFCC said:


> As an independent contractor, you aren't required to take a ride you don't feel comfortable with. Uber cannot deactivate you for this purpose.
> 
> However, the taxi commission/regulatory agency that licenses drivers and vehicles to operate for ride-sharing apps can impose severe penalties for denying a service animal. Here in New York City, the fine is $5000 for refusal of service animal, and TLC takes away your taxi license for 3 years. I really don't know the regulation at all for your city so you may need to google them or look on the TNC website or whatever.
> 
> Nothing against you but you shouldn't be in the taxi industry if you're allergic. In fact, you would be denied a taxi license in NYC in your case.


Saying that I should not be in the taxi industry because of my allergies (which are health problems) is quite discrimatory don't you think? If there can be accommodations made for someone who needs a service animal because of their health problems why can't there be accommodations for someone like me? Being denied a taxi license because of a health issue sounds like a law suit waiting to happen.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

peppersmommy said:


> actually you could still get sued. and lose your uber job. Most service animals are hypo-allergenic like mine, so your severe sickness would not be affected. Unless you just dont like animals and that is your reason to deny a service animal. Either way still curious as to why you would choose such a dangerous job. Given your severe sickness.


There is in fact no such thing as a hypo allergenic animal. Do the research and you will see. Allergies from animals can come from many forms. For instance, their saliva. Don't be fooled into the hypo allergenic hype! I actually love animals. I would have several if I did not develop these health problems as an adult. Why does a cop choose their job? It's a very dangerous job but they still do it because it's something they enjoy. Given the deadly outcome they could face everyday.


----------



## censoredbytheFCC (Jun 25, 2016)

BostonC said:


> Saying that I should not be in the taxi industry because of my allergies (which are health problems) is quite discrimatory don't you think? If there can be accommodations made for someone who needs a service animal because of their health problems why can't there be accommodations for someone like me? Being denied a taxi license because of a health issue sounds like a law suit waiting to happen.


You asked a question, me and others are giving you the answers.

I see that other people have told you already that your allergies are NOT covered under ADA. You're speaking to a person that has actual ADA accommodations for anxiety disorders and OCD. My best friend and her mom both need a service animal for hearing issues and I'll tell you straight up; they have a lawyer on standby just in case somebody wants to give them problems about their trained service dog.

Allergies are not a good enough reason to deny a service animal. If you tried that here in NYC, our TLC would immediately revoke your taxi license in lieu of the $5000 fine.

http://www.mass.gov/ago/consumer-re...rights/information-about-service-animals.html

Some information for Boston posted.


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

Older Chauffeur said:


> https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html


To this I would suggest that anyone pretending their animal was "trained" to do a specific task, and they were lying, they would open themselves up to criminal charges in some states:

http://dogtime.com/trending/29963-speak-fight-service-dog-fraud


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

censoredbytheFCC said:


> You asked a question, me and others are giving you the answers.
> 
> I see that other people have told you already that your allergies are NOT covered under ADA. You're speaking to a person that has actual ADA accommodations for anxiety disorders and OCD. My best friend and her mom both need a service animal for hearing issues and I'll tell you straight up; they have a lawyer on standby just in case somebody wants to give them problems about their trained service dog.
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting that link. 9'th question down answers my question. If the animals poses a threat to someone's health they do not have to be accepted. Should be like that everywhere.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

BostonC said:


> There is in fact no such thing as a hypo allergenic animal. Do the research and you will see. Allergies from animals can come from many forms. For instance, their saliva. Don't be fooled into the hypo allergenic hype! I actually love animals. I would have several if I did not develop these health problems as an adult. Why does a cop choose their job? It's a very dangerous job but they still do it because it's something they enjoy. Given the deadly outcome they could face everyday.


I love animals also. I try to have them over for dinner often.
Service sloth does not approve of allergies.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

BostonC said:


> Thanks for posting that link. 9'th question down answers my question. If the animals poses a threat to someone's health they do not have to be accepted. Should be like that everywhere.


Not arguing your point, but where did you read that "If the animal poses a threat to someone's health they do not have to be accepted?" I read the part about taxis, which is your issue, right? But I didn't see any exemptions there either.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

agtg said:


> To this I would suggest that anyone pretending their animal was "trained" to do a specific task, and they were lying, they would open themselves up to criminal charges in some states:
> 
> http://dogtime.com/trending/29963-speak-fight-service-dog-fraud


But that's a different issue. I'm not sure it rises to the level of criminal charges, but rather perhaps infractions, as in the case of handicapped parking violations. As I said earlier, I'm suspicious of some of the people I see putting "Service Animal" vests on their dogs. I agree with the writer of the blog for which you provided the link. But the law is still the law, and it says professional training for the service animal is not required.

If there were some teeth in the law, and certification of some sort required, it might be possible to enforce what the ADA was intended to do. After all, people who want to use dedicated handicapped parking need a placard/license plate. Sure, there are those who abuse that, but if they are caught parking without a placard there are stiff financial penalties, and using a placard of another person can result in the loss of the placard to the disabled person. Not so with service animals yet, AFAIK.
I don't want to add unnecessarily to the burdens of the truly disabled, but I would bet that a lot of them would accept the chore of putting a specially issued official vest on their dogs if they knew it would eliminate some of the cheaters. Just as with the parking placards, doctors could be involved in the process.

I've seen a lady lately shopping in the grocery store and also the pet supply store, (where it isn't an issue.) She has a small terrier, wearing a vest, which she is pushing around in a little cart, similar to a baby stroller. I've talked to her about dogs in general ( I have no right to ask the allowed two questions under the ADA). The pup interacts with people and seems to like the attention she gets. Is she a legitimate service dog? Who knows? But I have to admit that given the circumstances, I'm suspicious. She might be a comfort dog for a lady who appears to be a little erratic.

Thanks for replying- good discussions in this thread.

Edit: found that at least in CA, it does indeed constitute a crime to pretend your dog is a service animal. I stand corrected.

"The public place cannot require a person to "prove" that their dog is a service dog. A service dog is not required to be registered, certified, or identified as a service dog. However, in California, pretending to be an owner of a service dog is a criminal misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 (and/or up to six months imprisonment)."


----------



## agtg (Jun 8, 2016)

No one has proven that Uber drivers are a "public entity" in states that don't regulate Uber drivers. So, that makes most of this discussion a ruse to get drivers to fear legal retribution when, in fact, they are not obligated because they are not a public entity.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

I counted the questions wrong lol


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Is a service dog at least required to have some indicator if it being a service dog? 

What's stopping every single dog owner from just claiming a dog as a service dog and the driver having no ability to confirm?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

I would get a note from a doctor on their letterhead that explains the allergy in detail and then show that to passengers. I'm sure they will be sympathetic. It's not often you will get a service dog.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

BostonC said:


> Thanks for the reply. It's appreciated. I will have to read around for those posts.
> 
> Yes my allergies are that bad that I have been admitted or sent to the ER for a breathing treatment. I absolutely would have no choice but to refuse the rider. It doesn't take but 5 minutes for me to have a reaction and then the dog hair that will remain in the car to keep triggering my reaction. I was thinking the same that I would wait with the rider till someone else came along. There should be something that protects people like us just like there is a law to protect people with service animals. It only makes sense. I'm not trying to hop on the "im discriminated" bus here but this is kinda discriminating if you ask me.


If you're that allergic then h I w are you not having issues from folks like me who have several dogs and seem to always be covered in dog fur and dander (and cats, btw)?

It doesn't make sense.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> Is a service dog at least required to have some indicator if it being a service dog?
> 
> What's stopping every single dog owner from just claiming a dog as a service dog and the driver having no ability to confirm?


No.

Nothing. Although you can refuse a service animal if it's not well behaved. They all are, though.

Bear in mind uber will always err on the side of the pax.


----------



## Tr4vis Ka1anick (Oct 2, 2016)

I spent billions trying to bribe Chinese officials unsuccessfully. My bribing budget is extremely low right now, otherwise we would be throwing millions at the ADA. Maybe next year.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

BostonC said:


> Saying that I should not be in the taxi industry because of my allergies (which are health problems) is quite discrimatory don't you think? If there can be accommodations made for someone who needs a service animal because of their health problems why can't there be accommodations for someone like me? Being denied a taxi license because of a health issue sounds like a law suit waiting to happen.


I can't work a job where I have to pick up 50 lb boxes because my back can't handle it since being fractured 8 years ago. I don't go looking for those jobs.

Being blind would mean you couldn't drive for uber. I want to see THAT lawsuit.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

BostonC said:


> I counted the questions wrong lol


Okay, I read that part earlier. But it refers specifically to an animal's *behavior* being a direct threat to the safety and health of others.
I don't think you can infer that your allergies would be covered under that statement.
(I'm not a lawyer, that's just my opinion based on what I read.)


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> If you're that allergic then h I w are you not having issues from folks like me who have several dogs and seem to always be covered in dog fur and dander (and cats, btw)?
> 
> It doesn't make sense.


I never said that? I have severe problems. I can't even go near someone who has dog hair on them. It makes perfect sense.

All I did was ask a simple question. I didn't need to get jumped all over by some of you. I do this job because I'm a single mom of 3. It's what works for me. I will be getting a letter from my dr to keep on hand to provide to passengers if ever needed. I'm done with this thread. It's unbelievable how some can jump all over someone just for asking a simple question. Take care all


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> I would get a note from a doctor on their letterhead that explains the allergy in detail and then show that to passengers. I'm sure they will be sympathetic. It's not often you will get a service dog.


This is exactly what I was thinking yesterday. It's what I'm going to do. I know it will be very rare that I get a service dog. Having the letter I would think that someone with a health issue would feel sympathetic towards someone else with a health issue.


----------



## simpsonsverytall (Nov 6, 2015)

Do whatever you want. As long as you behave wisely and play dumb, you aren't going to lose your job for avoiding the 1/1000 trips that happen to involve service animals. 

The rest is just yapping back and forth on social media


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

simpsonsverytall said:


> Do whatever you want. As long as you behave wisely and play dumb, you aren't going to lose your job for avoiding the 1/1000 trips that happen to involve service animals.
> 
> The rest is just yapping back and forth on social media


Exactly


----------



## Tr4vis Ka1anick (Oct 2, 2016)

We suspended this driver for not following the Uber ADA policy in regards to service animals.






Uber is settling this outside of court.

Let this be a lesson.


----------



## Tenzo (Jan 25, 2016)

at,
I'm pretty sure your source from "dog time" does not over ride the ADA

Still waiting for a cite dude.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

BostonC said:


> I counted the questions wrong lol


You are really invested in getting this wrong. Your citation said nothing at all about your allergies. Your citation mentioned animal behavior, specifically aggressive behavior.

Once again, the law is very clear on this. Your allergies do not give you a free pass, and you are way beyond delusional on this issue to have read that paragraph that you cited and come out of it with the belief that it says anything about your health issues. It does not. It very clearly and unequivocally does not say what you apparently believe it says.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

BostonC said:


> This is exactly what I was thinking yesterday. It's what I'm going to do. I know it will be very rare that I get a service dog. Having the letter I would think that someone with a health issue would feel sympathetic towards someone else with a health issue.


I'll repeat my earlier post and wish you the best of luck. This is the worst course of action you can take. If you get sued you can go to court and cry all you want and you will lose everything you own. Obviously you want to believe what you want to believe but you've had some good advice given to you here and some clowns with some axes to grind have given you terrible advice. If I were you, I'd rethink this idea of yours. If nothing else, go talk to a real lawyer about this.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> I'll repeat my earlier post and wish you the best of luck. This is the worst course of action you can take. If you get sued you can go to court and cry all you want and you will lose everything you own. Obviously you want to believe what you want to believe but you've had some good advice given to you here and some clowns with some axes to grind have given you terrible advice. If I were you, I'd rethink this idea of yours. If nothing else, go talk to a real lawyer about this.


Thanks for wishing me luck. No need to call me delusional! If someone can have an animal wherever they may chose because of their health then I don't see what is so delusional about me fighting for what I believe in for my health. I've already have a letter from my dr and a call into a lawyer.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

_*Q*. * What if a service animal barks or growls at other people or otherwise acts out of control?*

A: You may exclude any animal, including a service animal, from your facility when that animal's behavior poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others. For example, any service animal that displays vicious behavior towards other guests or customers may be excluded..._

You read that and came to the conclusion that what it actually says is:

_If the animals poses a threat to someone's health they do not have to be accepted._

That is delusional. And I'll tell you something else. You're dealing with a population that is very litigious and the reason they are is they've heard every excuse for why people refuse to comply with ADA and they win almost every case. The second you present a doctor's note to somebody you are putting yourself at their mercy and you'd better hope you're charming enough to convince them to not take every possession you currently have. Good luck with that.


----------



## BostonC (Sep 12, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> _*Q*. * What if a service animal barks or growls at other people or otherwise acts out of control?*
> 
> A: You may exclude any animal, including a service animal, from your facility when that animal's behavior poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others. For example, any service animal that displays vicious behavior towards other guests or customers may be excluded..._
> 
> ...


My health is not an excuse, just like lots of people who really need an animal to help with their health is not an excuse. If these people can fight for what they believe is their right to have an animal to help them with their health then how the hell am I delusional to want to fight for what is right when it comes to my health?! What the hell makes their reason better then my reason (not an excuse!) I get that some people will lie and say they have allergies just so they don't have an animal in their car and they don't have to deal with the animal hair etc. But I have a real reason. This is my job that helps to feed and put clothes on my kids backs! I'm so sick and tired of people who want to poke fun of people who have allergies and neglect to realize that some allergies are life threatening! There are things I can't be near or eat or I can stop breathing. How is it ok for them but not me?!


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

BostonC said:


> My health is not an excuse, just like lots of people who really need an animal to help with their health is not an excuse. If these people can fight for what they believe is their right to have an animal to help them with their health then how the hell am I delusional to want to fight for what is right when it comes to my health?! What the hell makes their reason better then my reason (not an excuse!) I get that some people will lie and say they have allergies just so they don't have an animal in their car and they don't have to deal with the animal hair etc. But I have a real reason. This is my job that helps to feed and put clothes on my kids backs! I'm so sick and tired of people who want to poke fun of people who have allergies and neglect to realize that some allergies are life threatening! There are things I can't be near or eat or I can stop breathing. How is it ok for them but not me?!


The problem is, they fought it in court and have legal precedence to allow them to do what they do. *You do not. *

You are free to become, or hire, a lobbyist to fight this battle, but you will not be able to fight nor win from the driver seat of your Uber ride.

To be clear, i agree with you, however, that doesn't change that they have the law on their side and no one has fought for the law to protect people with allergies. Someone has to start a movement, perhaps it's you!


----------



## Scooby4429 (Aug 6, 2016)

agtg said:


> I'm allergic to animal fur, too. It's funny how people casually presume one person's right should unfairly over-ride another person's right in a case.
> 
> It's really absurd. So a person who claims they have some anxiety disorder goes to a doctor and the doctor agrees that a pet would help ease their anxiety. This person can now take this pet everywhere because of this medical accommodation.
> 
> ...


You have applied to be an Uber driver. That's why. Do you know how many people have PTSD from war and depend on a service animal? It's demeaning for you to call it "anxiety" and imply that these people have nothing else to do but infringe on your life with their animal. They have the right as the customer. You gave yours up when you applied to be a driver. I don't know about you, but I'd take an animal over some of these vomit bags at midnight who want to get in my car......just saying. Try being polite, explain your allergy, and request if they mind ordering another ride. Hopefully you are more polite in person than what you sound like on here.


----------



## Scooby4429 (Aug 6, 2016)

Anyone having a problem with service animals should not drive. You applied to be an Uber driver which implies that your customer comes first. My customers have always asked at the beginning of the trip if I mind having an animal in my vehicle and NO, I do not mind. I have never refused to drive anyone with an animal and the day I start is the day I should stop driving.


----------



## CrazyT (Jul 2, 2016)

Scooby4429 said:


> You have applied to be an Uber driver. That's why. Do you know how many people have PTSD from war and depend on a service animal? It's demeaning for you to call it "anxiety" and imply that these people have nothing else to do but infringe on your life with their animal. They have the right as the customer. You gave yours up when you applied to be a driver. I don't know about you, but I'd take an animal over some of these vomit bags at midnight who want to get in my car......just saying. Try being polite, explain your allergy, and request if they mind ordering another ride. Hopefully you are more polite in person than what you sound like on here.


This is exactly why I just take pets with the riders. I keep towels in the back I can put on the seats for the possibility of messy bums or wet paws. I don't know if that lady with the fuzzball is a veteran and needs the dog to leave the house, or just a mom to a four footed baby. I haven't had that many animals on rides, but a few. Yes I have allergies. I've had attacks after a pax was in the car and I find out after the fact she had cat hair all over her that was now in the car. I have a sticky roller for those situations and a bottle of allergy meds in my purse.

If someone is so severely allergic, maybe they should re-think driving. I have some pretty severe food allergies and there are a limited number of places I go where I know for a fact I can eat. Most places are pretty cool with accommodating leaving out certain things, but sometimes things get messed up. As a general rule of thumb of I'm not close to one of the places I know I'm ok at, I don't eat out much.


----------



## nickd8775 (Jul 12, 2015)

You could mention that it's a felony to falsely claim a service animal. That would scare someone who's casually lying about a service animal.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> If you're that allergic then h I w are you not having issues from folks like me who have several dogs and seem to always be covered in dog fur and dander (and cats, btw)?
> 
> It doesn't make sense.


Good point. I can tell who the pet owners are from my airport runs.
There will be hairs on the seats from their clothes,and hairs in the trunk from their luggage.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

BostonC said:


> I understand that it is the law that we accept drivers with service animals. I have a SEVERE allergy to dogs and other animals that could land me in the hospital. Is there anything that protects me when I do not accept these riders??


That's amazing. Sorry to hear this. but, I guess the only way to put it is that you're in the wrong business. 
You can't turn away a service dog and many people are going claim their pet is a service dog ( most of them take them to diploma mills ) and you can't even legally challenge whether or not it is a service dog.

Is it breathing dander that sets it off? ( get a nurse's mask? that's my recommendation, but I don't know if that would help )


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

BostonC said:


> Thanks for the reply. It's appreciated. I will have to read around for those posts.
> 
> Yes my allergies are that bad that I have been admitted or sent to the ER for a breathing treatment. I absolutely would have no choice but to refuse the rider. It doesn't take but 5 minutes for me to have a reaction and then the dog hair that will remain in the car to keep triggering my reaction. I was thinking the same that I would wait with the rider till someone else came along. There should be something that protects people like us just like there is a law to protect people with service animals. It only makes sense. I'm not trying to hop on the "im discriminated" bus here but this is kinda discriminating if you ask me.





Oscar Levant said:


> That's amazing. Sorry to hear this. but, I guess the only way to put it is that you're in the wrong business.
> You can't turn away a service dog and many people are going claim their pet is a service dog ( most of them take them to diploma mills ) and you can't even legally challenge whether or not it is a service dog.
> 
> Is it breathing dander that sets it off? ( get a nurse's mask? that's my recommendation, but I don't know if that would help )


If it is that serious you need to find another line of work, that's the long and short of it. I'm allergic to a siamese cats ( the short haired type ) , but they have to crawl right up to my face, also great danes ( short haired fir type ) but it has to be overwhelming, like three of them and me in the same room. My head just feels like its' on fire, when it happens, but nothing to call 911 over. In my life, I've only had this happen twice.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

nickd8775 said:


> You could mention that it's a felony to falsely claim a service animal. That would scare someone who's casually lying about a service animal.


Is it a felony in your state? In CA it is a misdemeanor.

The law of certain jurisdictions makes it a crime to pretend to own or train a guide, signal or service dog. See for example California Penal Code section 365.7:

365.7. (a) Any person who knowingly and fraudulently represents himself or herself, through verbal or written notice, to be the owner or trainer of any canine licensed as, to be qualified as, or identified as, a guide, signal, or service dog, as defined in subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) of Section 365.5 and paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 54.1 of the Civil Code, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(b) As used in this section, "owner" means any person who owns a guide, signal, or service dog, or who is authorized by the owner to use the guide, signal, or service dog.


----------



## Willzuber (Aug 28, 2015)

This pretty much sums it up folks.

https://www.ada.gov/archive/qasrvc.htm


----------

