# ADA Wars - Pax Service Animal vs My Allergies



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.

Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.

So - who wins here? My ADA rights as a driver, or pax's ADA rights as a passenger?

I feel I should have an ADA right to refuse the pax. The pax is inconvenienced less, as they can get another Uber within minutes... whereas my car will be contaminated with pet dander - leaving me in a position where sneezing could make driving unsafe (for me and for future pax too).

Not that it matters legally, but I have cloth seats (bought the car long before UberX existed) and would have opted for leather knowing things like this would play as a factor. Cloth grabs pet dander and fur like nothing else.

P.S. I'm not a jerk, I would do whatever it takes to assist someone (especially someone legitimately disabled) in getting another driver. I'd park the car and wait with them for another Uber if it would help. I've pulled over and helped disabled people reinstall the app from scratch when it wasn't working.

_(Asking both in theory and with Uber/Lyft determinations in the past on this subject).
_
*Update:* I had no idea this was going to generate 230 posts! You will find that Uber does have a policy for this very situation. It isn't written, but it is in a video.

If you have a documented allergy, pull over if possible, stand with pax, and instruct them to request second driver. Assist pax in requesting 2nd driver, if they need help. Then greet the second driver. If it's not safe to stop, ask the pax to request second driver, inform them of your allergy and the policy, and document the situation that prevented you from pulling over (airport terminal, etc).

Following the Uber policy ensures you won't stand alone in court, and you'll be protected.

If you don't have a documented allergy, you can cancel (due to service animal) - but you risk reprisal from Uber (at-will deactivation for cause), and possibly local/state governments.


----------



## Phoenix666 (Mar 6, 2015)

Your rights. Will Uber pay for a doctor visit or allergy meds? Nope. Sorry, next car.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

You're a contractor, do the job your way.
Let Uber give us more rules, and get closer to loosing the employee lawsuits.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Unfortunately the Pax ADA rights trumps yours. Under the ADA laws fear of dogs or allergies are not sufficient not to allow a disabled person with their dog. Sorry but having allergies don't provide you with any ADA protection. I've seen several posts on this issue and I believe Uber's policy on allergies is that you can cancel the ride but you must wait until another uber driver comes and accepts the pax and her dog. Then hopefully uber will remove the cancellation from your record but I wouldn't hold your breath. Uber and you as an independent contractor can get into a lot of trouble if you violate the ADA laws. It's unfortunate but it's the law.

I personally have a service dog so I'm pretty familiar with the ADA laws. I try my best to be as respectful for others as I can be. When I'm a pax I always call the driver immediately to give them the option to opt out if they have dog issues of any kind. Not just allergies. If they don't want a dog in their car I respect that. I will cancel and so it won't hurt the driver. 

I totally understand your pain. I'm the same with cats. I walk into the vet my eyes swell and I feel awful for a day later. Even if i take a benedry. It's even worse in your case that you have to accept them in your car. I would recommend putting a blanket in your trunk if you have to pick up a service dog and the pax isn't willing to wait for another driver. And keep some benedryll close in hand. 

I also drive with my service dog. When a pax enters my car i tell them I have a service dog. Indeed on uber two of my three 5* comments are about how cute my dog is and nothing about me as a driver Only had one complaint on Lyft. At first Lyft insisted I call pax before the pickup and tell them I drive with a service dog and cancel if they have an issue. But that would exclude me from guarentee hourly rates. Lyft became very accommodating to me telling me if i have to cancel bc pax is uncomfortable or allergy let them know and they will remove the cancellation from my record.

But I'm not one of the self rightous service dog owner. I really go out of my way not to make my disability an issue for anyone else. Most other people I know are like that too. But then there are those self rightous one you have to look out for that believes they are entitled to everything and the world owes them. They are the ones who will file a complaint with ADA and make life hell. Hopefully you never get one of those pax or they will turn you in.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> You're a contractor, do the job your way.
> Let Uber give us more rules, and get closer to loosing the employee lawsuits.


Fireguy50 i don't want to sound disrespectful but you shouldn't give advice on something you don't know about. You don't want to mess around with the ADA laws. Both Uber and the driver are on the line bc we are independent contractors. If we were employees it would just be uber on the line. There are lawyers just waiting to go after ADA violators just as there are ambulance chasers. Both the driver and uber could be named in the suit and you think uber would provide representation for a driver? That's a joke. So the driver would have to pay for their own reputation. However it's more likely the attorneys would go after uber because they have deeper pockets. But it's still a headache for the driver that could be easily avoided.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> Fireguy50 i don't want to sound disrespectful but you shouldn't give advice on something you don't know about. You don't want to f#ck around with the ADA laws.


I know enough to be dangerous.
True service animals are expected to behavior a certain to a higher standard. I've only had 1 and it didn't cause any issue, I did need my sunroof for the smell!

Legally we can refuse or kick out any service animal that displays aggressive behavior.
And we can charge the cleaning fee if they mess up the vehicle.



FAC said:


> Fireguy50Both Uber and the driver are on the line bc we are independent contractors. If we were employees it would just be uber on the line. There are lawyers just waiting to go after ADA violators just as there are ambulance chasers. Both the driver and uber could be named in the suit and you think uber would provide representation for a driver? That's a joke. So the driver would have to pay for their own reputation. However it's more likely the attorneys would go after uber because they have deeper pockets. But it's still a headache for the driver that could be easily avoided.


Good reason for a dash cam, you can film the service animal discussion, document the behavior and mess. Video is always the best witness! And I say that because, now anybody with anxiety can classify their animal as "service ". It's a bit out of control in my opinion.

Document the animal, and send Uber your medical bills.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> But I'm not one of the self rightous service dog owner. I really go out of my way not to make my disability an issue for anyone else. Most other people I know are like that too. But then there are those self rightous one you have to look out for that believes they are entitled to everything and the world owes them. They are the ones who will file a complaint with ADA and make life hell. Hopefully you never get one of those pax or they will turn you in.


The one PAX I had contacted me before arrival to ask if the dog was okay. Very polite person, and good animal.

But I did have to use the sunroof on my way to the next request.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

You can ask two questions:

1. Is the animal a service dog
2. What has it been trained to do (it must be a specific task)

A wrong answer to either of those is grounds to deny the ride.

I always ask if the animal is a comfort or emotional support animal an answer of yes results in a denied ride. Comfort or emotional support animals are not service dogs, period end of story.

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


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Unfortunately the Pax ADA rights trumps yours. Under the ADA laws fear of dogs or allergies are not sufficient not to allow a disabled person with their dog. Sorry but having allergies don't provide you with any ADA protection. I've seen several posts on this issue and I believe Uber's policy on allergies is that you can cancel the ride but you must wait until another uber driver comes and accepts the pax and her dog. Then hopefully uber will remove the cancellation from your record but I wouldn't hold your breath. Uber and you as an independent contractor can get into a lot of trouble if you violate the ADA laws. It's unfortunate but it's the law.
> 
> I personally have a service dog so I'm pretty familiar with the ADA laws. I try my best to be as respectful for others as I can be. When I'm a pax I always call the driver immediately to give them the option to opt out if they have dog issues of any kind. Not just allergies. If they don't want a dog in their car I respect that. I will cancel and so it won't hurt the driver.
> 
> ...


Incorrect a service dog can be denied access if you have allegories.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Incorrect a service dog can be denied access if you have allegories.
> 
> View attachment 37112


It still would be a legal battle for the driver. A precedent must be set. Further the Uber rules specifically say all drivers must pick up pax with service dogs.

I would recommend if a driver is seriously allergic to the service dog, just tell the pax. Cancel the ride and wait to make sure they get picked up by another driver. Who wants to deal with the litigation? Moreover, the courts more often side with ADA.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> You can ask two questions:
> 
> 1. Is the animal a service dog
> 2. What has it been trained to do (it must be a specific task)
> ...


Be careful on the emotional support animals. They are allowed in public places depending on the state or municipal code. It's best to know what the laws in your state are regarding both service dogs and emotional support dogs. Also be aware of when the code was written. The ADA laws were updated in 2013. If there is a law prior to that federal law trumps if the state law is more restrictive than federal laws. For example the Georgia laws require a vest that code was put in place I think in 2009. The new ADA law doesn't require any identification so it trumps Georgia law. But if a state allows for less restriction than the federal laws i.e. Allowing support animals the same rights as service dogs that law trumps federal laws.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> It still would be a legal battle for the driver. A precedent must be set. Further the Uber rules specifically say all drivers must pick up pax with service dogs.
> 
> I would recommend if a driver is seriously allergic to the service dog, just tell the pax. Cancel the ride and wait to make sure they get picked up by another driver. Who wants to deal with the litigation? Moreover, the courts more often side with ADA.


But that's not what you said in your original reply, you stated "Unfortunantely the pax ADA rights trump yours. Under ADA laws a fear of dogs or allergies are not sufficient to not allow a disabled person with their dog." just clearing up the misinformation you put out there.

For someone who's "pretty familiar with ADA laws" you sure are putting out a lot of misinformation.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Be careful on the emotional support animals. They are allowed in public places depending on the state or municipal code. It's best to know what the laws in your state are regarding both service dogs and emotional support dogs. Also be aware of when the code was written. The ADA laws were updated in 2013. If there is a law prior to that federal law trumps if the state law is more restrictive than federal laws. For example the Georgia laws require a vest that code was put in place I think in 2009. The new ADA law doesn't require any identification so it trumps Georgia law. But if a state allows for less restriction than the federal laws i.e. Allowing support animals the same rights as service dogs that law trumps federal laws.


Again incorrect a states law may be more restrictive than federal, but not less restrictive. Therefore if the Feds say a service dog must wear a vest a state law cannot say a vest is not required because that would be less restrictive than the federal law.

As for emotional/support dogs under ADA, which we are governed by and a majority of states defer to, they are not service animals.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> Incorrect a service dog can be denied access if you have allegories.
> 
> View attachment 37112


Putting this in my legal laws printed thread
https://uberpeople.net/threads/laws-printed-and-ready.73718/

Can you tell me where that came from?

Government agencies
Link to document


----------



## Maderacopy (Nov 24, 2015)

We live in a time where someone else's rights trump your rights so you must figure if it is a right at all. I have no problem with cats or dogs even if they're not a service animal as long as they don't smell or cause damage or a mess in my car. Service animals are well trained and are normally well behaved. There are people out there that will test you to see if you make the right decision and if you don't plan on a lawsuit. I see it often in the food industry. I've seen people in restaurants with a measuring tape ready to trounce with a lawsuit.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> Putting this in my legal laws printed thread
> https://uberpeople.net/threads/laws-printed-and-ready.73718/
> 
> Can you tell me where that came from?
> ...


Came from the ADA site here:

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


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Incorrect a service dog can be denied access if you have allegories.


Beur Sorry Beur, get your facts straight! Allergies are *Not* grounds to deny service to a disabled.

See below: 









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


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

"Assigned to different locations of possible" it's possible for a person with a service dog to order another driver who's not allergic. 

Leave you emotional attachment out of the argument. If one is allergic they are not required to take a service dog. Read the link I posted along with the screen shot directly from the link.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Again incorrect a states law may be more restrictive than federal, but not less restrictive. Therefore if the Feds say a service dog must wear a vest a state law cannot say a vest is not required because that would be less restrictive than the federal law.
> 
> As for emotional/support dogs under ADA, which we are governed by and a majority of states defer to, they are not service animals.


Beur You have your story but here's what true, using Georgia as a great example...

(This is an excerpt of a previous response I made on this forum a while ago. See https://uberpeople.net/threads/dog-friendly-drivers.68948/page-7#post-980694)

The Georgia state laws claims, "Guide dog or service dog must be identified as having been trained by a school for seeing eye, hearing, service, or guide dogs..."

Vs....

The ADA laws claims, "People with disabilities have the right to train the dog themselves and are not required to use a professional service dog training program..."

Theses two laws contradict each other. Generally when there is a conflict in federal and state law, federal law trumps state law.

One guess for why there is conflict in the two laws is the dates they were last amended. The ADA provision on service animals was updated in 2010 and again in 2013. The last update to the Georgia statute on service animals looks like it occurred in 2007.

When the federal government passes laws, it is basically setting a minimum standard that all states must respect. Individual states are then free to adopt stronger protections or to fill in gaps in protection left by the federal framework. The only thing states cannot do is say that people in that state get less protections/rights than set out in the federal law.

In this case, the ADA provides greater rights/protections to a disabled individual than the language in the state law. So the ADA provisions trump the language in the state law.

Under the ADA guidelines...A service dog is not required to have any kind of paperwork, nor are they required to wear a special harness or identifying badge, though it is recommended (just because a disabled person and SD are less likely to be questioned if the SD is wearing a SD vest, and it also keeps other people from assuming that it's okay to run up and pet your dog while he/she is working). The only two questions a shop owner/employee can ask you are 1) Is your dog a service dog? and 2) What tasks is it trained to do for your disability? They cannot ask you what your disability is. They do have the right to ask you to leave if your SD is behaving badly (being aggressive, barking, relieving himself inside, etc.).

When it comes to disability law, the law that gives greater protection to the disabled person always wins out. In this case, the ADA would trump Georgia law. If the Georgia law were less restrictive for the disabled person than the ADA, however, the state law would win.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

This issue has been debated over and over again. All you have to do is search the forum for service dogs. It's a tired issue and I'm tired arguing with you Beur ! At this point discussing this matter further with you Beur is a complete waste of time as it seems you are dead set to make me wrong and make me into some kind of bad guy (gal) for some reason. 

The truth is some people really need the assistance of service dogs to try to live a normal life. Be grateful you are able to live a nor,al life without such assistance. Perhaps you could be a bit more compassionate to those who do need the assistance.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> "Assigned to different locations of possible" it's possible for a person with a service dog to order another driver who's not allergic.
> 
> Leave you emotional attachment out of the argument. If one is allergic they are not required to take a service dog. Read the link I posted along with the screen shot directly from the link.


Beur were you too busy typing a response to make me wrong to read my post. If so here it is again...









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


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Beur You have your story but here's what true, using Georgia as a great example...
> 
> (This is an excerpt of a previous response I made on this forum a while ago. See https://uberpeople.net/threads/dog-friendly-drivers.68948/page-7#post-980694)
> 
> ...


Exactly what I stated earlier a state law can be more restrictive than federal, but not less restrictive.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Beur were you too busy typing a response to make me wrong to read my post. If so here it is again...
> View attachment 37136
> 
> 
> http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


Why don't you call the ADA hotline and ask them yourself.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> "Assigned to different locations of possible" it's possible for a person with a service dog to order another driver who's not allergic.
> 
> Leave you emotional attachment out of the argument. If one is allergic they are not required to take a service dog. Read the link I posted along with the screen shot directly from the link.


I agree, Uber has different vehicles and there are taxi options available. So the ability to *assign a different vehicle* would give *allergies* a greater weight of evidence over the *refusal of ride* in a court of law.

Now this would all have to be medically documented, preferably before the incident and definitely before court.

It the driver has an epi pen for allergies, no way the ADA wins even at the Supreme Court level


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur. Just be thankful you don't have a disability requiring the assistance of a service dog...and perhaps show a little compassion to those who do need the extra assistance. It doesn't cost anything to be nice and little compassionate less fortunate than you.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Beur. Just be thankful you don't have a disability requiring the assistance of a service dog...and perhaps show a little compassion to those who do need the extra assistance. It doesn't cost anything to be nice and little compassionate less fortunate than you.


You're assuming things you know nothing about.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

The bottom line is a driver who decides they are not taking a pax with a legit ADA dog must wait for another driver, who takes the pax, not just shows up or [you] will have a problem, possibly tossed for it. You are required to wait, not take the pax. Now, it might be worth your while to take the pax than lose money waiting for a willing driver.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> You're assuming things you know nothing about.


Maybe so. But it doesn't hurt to show some kindness to another person.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Maybe so. But it doesn't hurt to show some kindness to another person.


Where have a been unkind? Calling you out on your dissemination misinformation is being unkind? Or was it because I asked in another thread what task you 17lb Westie was specifically trained to do?

If find it interesting you keep quoting Georgia law, yet you live in Denver.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> The one PAX I had contacted me before arrival to ask if the dog was okay. Very polite person, and good animal.
> 
> But I did have to use the sunroof on my way to the next request.










Ozium is every drivers best friend! Air freshner and sanitizer. Doesn't mask orders it Eliminsters them. Got it in my car, kitchen, bathroom. You cand find it at most auto parts store or Walmart.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> The bottom line is a driver who decides they are not taking a pax with a legit ADA dog must wait for another driver, who takes the pax, not just shows up or [you] will have a problem, possibly tossed for it. You are required to wait, not take the pax. Now, it might be worth your while to take the pax than lose money waiting for a willing driver.


How you know this? It seems like common sense, but you wrote it like an Uber secret policy. Anything we should be aware of?


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> How you know this? It seems like common sense, but you wrote it like an Uber secret policy. Anything we should be aware of?


He's right, you must wait with the pax for another driver to show up who accepts the dog, but this only applies to a legitimate service dog.

Most legitimate service dog owners I know and have run into are sympathetic to a person with animal dander issues. It the fake emotional support/comfort dog owners who raise a stink and start screaming about ADA. Once you school them on the rules they backdown. Here in CA they can be fined for misrepresenting a pet as a service animal.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> How you know this? It seems like common sense, but you wrote it like an Uber secret policy. Anything we should be aware of?


That was a big topic in their training videos. I watched it at least twice, showing you how to take apart a wheelchair so it fits in your trunk. That video was after the giving away free water bottles video.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> That was a big topic in their training videos. I watched it at least twice, showing you how to take apart a wheelchair so it fits in your trunk. That video was after the giving away free water bottles video.


LOL
I watched too many videos that didn't help when I started as well.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

This guy was tossed and fined.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...50-refusing-accept-blind-woman-guide-dog.html


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> This guy was tossed and fined.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...50-refusing-accept-blind-woman-guide-dog.html


I'm sure the rules are different in Europe compared to the states. I'll take the time to call the ADA line this week to get a definitive answer on allergies and service dogs and Uber drivers.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> I'm sure the rules are different in Europe compared to the states. I'll take the time to call the ADA line this week to get a definitive answer on allergies and service dogs and Uber drivers.


If you had an epi pen level allergy (rare), there's a lawyer in America ready for his 15 minutes of fame at The Supreme Court.

(Hate to edit this again)
But.....
99% of people it would just ruin the rest of their day on Benadryl.
And possibly need a vehicle cleaning depending on cloth seats and carpet.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Where have a been unkind? Calling you out on your dissemination misinformation is being unkind? Or was it because I asked in another thread what task you 17lb Westie was specifically trained to do?
> 
> If find it interesting you keep quoting Georgia law, yet you live in Denver.


I'm not disseminating any information. The point is error on the safe side to avoid litigation.

Also it's been my experience of you that seek out to make me wrong for some reason. What did i do, kill your dog in a past life.

I bring up Georgia because it's the one state that the state ADA laws directly contradict federal laws. No other state does that. Also brought it up as an example since local and state laws might differ re emotional support dogs.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> If you had an epi pen level allergy (rare), there's a lawyer in America ready for his 15 minutes of fame at The Supreme Court.
> 
> (Hate to edit this again)
> But.....
> ...


Not your problem if your next pax get an allergy attack. If you are allergic to dogs then you must wait for another driver to take the dog. No need for medicine.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> I'm not disseminating any information. The point is error on the safe side to avoid litigation.
> 
> Also it's been my experience of you that seek out to make me wrong for some reason. What did i do, kill your dog in a past life.
> 
> ...


Seek you out to make you wrong? This is our first interaction on the forum.

If you order a ride and A driver asks you what specific task your service dog is trained to do and you refuse to answer the legally allowed question they can deny you a ride.

Allowable questions:

1. Is the dog a service dog?
If yes
2. What specific task is the dog trained to do?

Failure to properly answer either of these questions allows the day over to deny you a ride.

As I said before you're too emotionally attached to this topic to answer questions.

As for Georgia I've already explained several times that a state law can be more restrictive than a federal law, but not less restrictive.

As I said in a previous post I will call the ADA helpline to get a definitive answer on Uber Drivers with allergies and service dogs.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Let's go back to statics, and take a actual count?

This has only happened to me ONCE since I started.
AND she was nice enough to contact me before arrival to ask if the dog was okay with me?
After dropoff, sunroof fully opened, dog smell gone before the next PAX got in the back.

So has anyone had a situation where they were surprised by a dog and forced into this situation?


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> Let's go back to statics, and take a actual count?
> 
> This has only happened to me ONCE since I started.
> AND she was nice enough to contact me before arrival to ask if the dog was okay with me?
> ...


Not forced into taking them, but did have it once. Pax didn't call and it wasn't a service dog, but took them anyway because I like animals way more than I like people.


----------



## Squirming Like A Toad (Apr 7, 2016)

Beur said:


> You can ask two questions:
> 
> 1. Is the animal a service dog
> 2. What has it been trained to do (it must be a specific task)
> ...


All depends on your state, and the state laws regarding service animals may be more inclusive than the federal ones. In CT if any physician says it's a service animal, it's a service animal.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> All depends on your state, and the state laws regarding service animals may be more inclusive than the federal ones. In CT if any physician says it's a service animal, it's a service animal.


California defers to federal law


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I did some digging on the surface. Beur you may ask those two questions, however I read you shouldn't. Sounds more like asking a woman when is she due and she might not be pregnant. If you observe the dog working like with a blind person then there is no reason to ask. It shouldn't take three pages to explain this, it is your job and FAC shouldn't need to explain or defend herself. We are talking about ADA dogs here. I'm waiting for Coachman to tell me it's not a rule in the partner agreement.  Here we go.  Take pets or don't, take ADA dogs or find a driver that you see put in their car or you're tossed at a minimum.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> Allowable questions:
> 
> 1. Is the dog a service dog?
> If yes
> 2. What specific task is the dog trained to do?


3. Can it ride in the trunk?

Don't care who you are, that's funny!


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> I did some digging on the surface. Beur you may ask those two questions, however I read you shouldn't. Sounds more like asking a woman when is she due and she might not be pregnant. If you observe the dog working like with a blind person then there is no reason to ask. It shouldn't take three pages to explain this, it is your job and FAC shouldn't need to explain or defend herself. We are talking about ADA dogs here. I'm waiting for Coachman to tell me it's not a rule in the partner agreement.  Here we go.  Take pets or don't, take ADA dogs or find a driver that you see put in their car or you're tossed at a minimum.


No one asked FAC to defend herself. She spread misinformation to which I posted the ADA FAQ, she took offense and started to attack. If you're going to attack, I'll give back as good as is being given to me. I standby my assertion that she's too emotionally tied to the issue to give an unbiased answer.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Seek you out to make you wrong? This is our first interaction on the forum.
> 
> If you order a ride and A driver asks you what specific task your service dog is trained to do and you refuse to answer the legally allowed question they can deny you a ride.
> 
> ...


I'm quite aware of the law. But your not driving me anywhere. If I were to get in your car I would properly answer. In other places typically I'm just asked if she is a medical dog and I say yes. In Denver the main grocery chain Kings Soopers (part of Kroger) allows dogs regardless if it's a service dog or not. So does Whole Foods. Only once I had to make an issue of the fact when I was at a hotel and they wanted to charge me a $100 pet fee.

I also go out of my way so my dog doesn't bother anyone. Also when I'm a pax I call the driver and ask if it's ok for me to bring my dog. I don't even mention it's a service dog bc I understand some drivers don't like or want dogs in their car. I also offer to cancel if they have a problem so they don't get dinged. All the drivers appreciate the call and all had no problem with me bringing her.

I have consideration for others. I do my best not to impose on others. When I drive I tell the pax I have a service dog. I'm willing to cancel the ride if they have an issue so they don't get charged cancellation fee. Lyft is awesome. They told me to contact them if I ever have to cancel they will remove the cancellation from my record. Uber has been indifferent.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> 3. Can it ride in the trunk?
> 
> Don't care who you are, that's funny!


Only if we can put unruly drunks in the trunk too!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> No one asked FAC to defend herself. She spread misinformation to which I posted the ADA FAQ, she took offense and started to attack. If you're going to attack, I'll give back as good as is being given to me. I standby my assertion that she's too emotionally tied to the issue to give an unbiased answer.


I did not spread any misinformation. All my information came directly from the ADA website and I included the link to the URL for all my references.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

FAC said:


> I'm quite aware of the law. But your not driving me anywhere. If I were to get in your car I would properly answer. In other places typically I'm just asked if she is a medical dog and I say yes. In Denver the main grocery chain Kings Soopers (part of Kroger) allows dogs regardless if it's a service dog or not. So does Whole Foods. Only once I had to make an issue of the fact when I was at a hotel and they wanted to charge me a $100 pet fee.
> 
> I also go out of my way so my dog doesn't bother anyone. Also when I'm a pax I call the driver and ask if it's ok for me to bring my dog. I don't even mention it's a service dog bc I understand some drivers don't like or want dogs in their car. I also offer to cancel if they have a problem so they don't get dinged. All the drivers appreciate the call and all had no problem with me bringing her.
> 
> I have consideration for others. I do my best not to impose on others. When I drive I tell the pax I have a service dog. I'm willing to cancel the ride if they have an issue so they don't get charged cancellation fee. Lyft is awesome. They told me to contact them if I ever have to cancel they will remove the cancellation from my record. Uber has been indifferent.


The hotel can charge a fee for a pet, not an ADA dog. Imagine all the shoppers allergic to dogs at those stores.  I help run a club and a member asked if she could bring her pet dog. I said I need to be sure no one has allergies and that the place will allow a pet, who isn't an ADA dog. Her dog was very nice, cute and quiet. We decided to take a chance and snuck her in. I warned her before she brought the dog that if there was a problem, I'm tossing them both out.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> Only if we can put unruly drunks in the trunk too!


Nope, but being an off duty firefighter paramedic. They go home, or in the back of a Police car or Ambulance. Usually my choice!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Anyways my dog is better behaved than most kids


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

FAC said:


> Anyways my dog is better behaved than most kids


You're just asking Coachman to step in here now.


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> View attachment 37148
> 
> Ozium is every drivers best friend! Air freshner and sanitizer. Doesn't mask orders it Eliminsters them. Got it in my car, kitchen, bathroom. You cand find it at most auto parts store or Walmart.


You know even less about how alergies work than you do ADA.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 thank you for your service as a firefighter. IMHO I think all firefighters are heros. You put your life at risk to save us. Thank you


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> Anyways my dog is better behaved than most kids


Somehow I knew you were a dog lover the way you are more concerned about dogs than people. Which I find to be a typical rudeness found with dog lovers and smokers.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> You're just asking Coachman to step in here now.


I can't wait for Coachman to join the party. Surprised he hasn't joined it yet.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

SafeT said:


> Somehow I knew you were a dog lover the way you are more concerned about dogs than people. Which I find to be a typical rudeness found with dog lovers and smokers.


To be fair, I'd take a dog any day of the week over an ill mannered human.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

SafeT said:


> Somehow I knew you were a dog lover the way you are more concerned about dogs than people. Which I find to be a typical rudeness found with dog lovers and smokers.


What is this, pick on FAC day? Obviously you haven't read the entire thread. Yes I'm a dog lover, but i also love and respect humans too.



FAC said:


> I also go out of my way so my dog doesn't bother anyone. Also when I'm a pax I call the driver and ask if it's ok for me to bring my dog. I don't even mention it's a service dog bc I understand some drivers don't like or want dogs in their car. I also offer to cancel if they have a problem so they don't get dinged. All the drivers appreciate the call and all had no problem with me bringing her.
> 
> I have consideration for others. I do my best not to impose on others. When I drive I tell the pax I have a service dog. I'm willing to cancel the ride if they have an issue so they don't get charged cancellation fee. Lyft is awesome. They told me to contact them if I ever have to cancel they will remove the cancellation from my record. Uber has been indifferent.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

SafeT said:


> Somehow I knew you were a dog lover the way you are more concerned about dogs than people. Which I find to be a typical rudeness found with dog lovers and smokers.


I think it's people who rely on a dog and the drivers who give good drivers a bad reputation when they do not know the law.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Here is something curious.

In the District of Columbia, a taxicab driver who files a Doctor Certification with the Taxicab Commission and keeps a copy of it in his cab is not required to haul any animals, service or otherwise. The rulemaking specifically exempts cab drivers who comply with the provisions from hauling any animals, service or otherwise.

I was a company official when the ADA was in effect. Before the Taxicab Commission put into effect this rule, my company had a few cases before the Human Rights Office involving drivers who refused transport to guide dogs. Every time, I required the driver to bring with him to the hearing a paper from his doctor, on office letterhead or on a form that identified the office that stated that the driver was allergic to animals. Every time, the Human Rights Office dismissed the complaint.. Do keep in mind that if you are found liable for a Human Rights Complaint in the District of Columbia, the City can yank _*EVERY*_ licence that you have: *ENGLISH TRANSLATION:* you are out of business.

There must be something in the ADA that I, and those who have commented on this subject in the past, are missing. I can not imagine that the District of Columbia would accept an allergy as an excuse if the Feds will not. This goes double because in the District of Columbia, the Taxicab Commission is well known for trampling Common Law Rights, Legislated Protections and even Constitutional Rights of the cab drivers. Considering who runs the D.C. Government, I would fully expect it to take the attitude that Special Rights trump Equal Rights every time. It does not take that attitude, in this case, at least.

I have seen the language that FAC posted. Further, as she has a service animal, I would expect that she would know the law. Most people who have these animals are aware of their rights and are quite vocal when their rights are trampled.

The business about putting them in different rooms does raise some questions, as that would be impossible in the confines of the typical sedan used for Uber or hacking. Further, the Feds' use of the "separate but equal" language suggests that even it is aware that the idea is that the person suffering from the allergy has just as much right to avoid becoming ill as does the person with animal to use a service.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I wonder if the DC rules have changed? That would be interesting.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> I wonder if the DC rules have changed? That would be interesting.


No, in fact, the Taxicab Commission rulemaking is recent. All that it did was legally enshrine unwritten policy. I battled those cases before the Human Rights Office years back. It is funny that no one there ever pointed out to me that the ADA had language that stated that "allergy was not an excuse". In fact, on another topic on this subject on this very forum, I got egg on my face because I was going on my experience in D.C. rather than actually reading the law.

Still, D.C. does allow allergic cab drivers to refuse to haul animals, regardless of the animal's purpose.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Another Uber Driver, yes I'm keenly aware of the laws and I do get outspoken when my rights are trampled on; but I also do my best not to trample on other people as well. I'm seriously allergic to cats. One hour at the vet will put me down for a day. So I am very respectful of those allergic to dogs. Even though my West Highland Terrier is considered a hypoallergenic dog and doesn't have the dander that causes allergies. I still respect people who are uncomfortable around her. She is also a therapy dog. She loves kids more than treats but not as much as belly rubs. I take her to the children's hospital often and it warms my heart how she is able to help a child forget for a bit he is sick. I also take her to retirement homes and she just as a special way to light up the eyes of the elderly. She is a very special dog.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FAC said:


> Unfortunately the Pax ADA rights trumps yours.


Even if it creates a hazardous situation for the driver? You've made some very strong statements, I'd like to see some case law and/or statues to back them up.

It creates a no-win situation for either passenger or driver if the driver cannot safely operate the vehicle, due to the allergy. I sincerely hope you aren't arguing that I should operate the vehicle when it is not safe to do so, because your reply inferred that I should.

Frankly, I would fight at the regulatory level to challenge those opinions. I flat out disagree with them.

*I will not take a service animal in my car if it creates an unsafe situation. My allergy blood levels are high enough that it does. Sorry if you disagree - I think your opinion is dangerous.* But I would be happy to see it backed up with citation, rather than opinion.


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

For those who are lucky enough to not have alergies I can tell you that the animal dander and smell does not instantly go away when the animal leaves the car. It can last for days or weeks. You have to shampoo the carpet and wipe all the surfaces. It may still be in your car vents for a while also because the ac pulls everything through the vents. No, I am not taking a dog. I have to spend hours, days, weeks in my car after the dog takes a $5 ride.
Endless headaches, sinus trouble. No thanks.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Beur said:


> Incorrect a service dog can be denied access if you have allegories.
> 
> View attachment 37112


Bingo! Thanks for citing statutes that clearly underscore the situation. Totally 100% agree with you.

Not only did you answer the question - you cited ADA interpretation! Crowdsourcing prevails as usual!

If you have pet allergies, and drive professionally for Uber, I encourage you to get a blood test. Insurance should cover it - not Uber certainly - but I paid $5 copay for my lab work last year.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Even if it creates a hazardous situation for the driver? You've made some very strong statements, I'd like to see some case law and/or statues to back them up.
> 
> It creates a no-win situation for either passenger or driver if the driver cannot safely operate the vehicle, due to the allergy. I sincerely hope you aren't arguing that I should operate the vehicle when it is not safe to do so, because your reply inferred that I should.
> 
> ...


No one said you must take an ADA dog, you must park and wait for a driver that does take them.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

SafeT said:


> For those who are lucky enough to not have alergies I can tell you that the animal dander and smell does not instantly go away when the animal leaves the car. It can last for days or weeks. You have to shampoo the carpet and wipe all the surfaces. It may still be in your car vents for a while also because the ac pulls everything through the vents. No, I am not taking a dog. I have to spend hours, days, weeks in my car after the dog takes a $5 ride.
> Endless headaches, sinus trouble. No thanks.





HoldenDriver said:


> Bingo! Thanks for citing statutes that clearly underscore the situation. Totally 100% agree with you.


Don't take them, just wait for another driver or you get tossed.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> Even if it creates a hazardous situation for the driver? You've made some very strong statements, I'd like to see some case law and/or statues to back them up.
> 
> It creates a no-win situation for either passenger or driver if the driver cannot safely operate the vehicle, due to the allergy. I sincerely hope you aren't arguing that I should operate the vehicle when it is not safe to do so, because your reply inferred that I should.
> 
> Frankly, I would fight at the regulatory level to challenge those opinions. I flat out disagree with them.


Read the thread I've posted the laws re service dogs directly from the ADA site. Just as 5 Star Guy shared, Uber's policy is that the driver doesn't have to take the pax but has to wait until another driver shows up that will take the pax.

I don't disagree it puts a burden on the drivers. Especially those who are allergic to dogs. I'm deathly allergic to cats and wouldn't want one in my car.

Personally I do my best to respect others and try very hard not burden others with my service dogs. Other people I know are the same. Unfortunately there are a few out there that have no reguard for others. They have a sense of entitlement because they have a disability. But then again there are people without disabilities that also have a sense of entitlement as well.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> No one said you must take an ADA dog, you must park and wait for a driver that does take them.


Just curious... Where does Uber says I have to wait for another driver? I'm happy to but my searching found no public-facing documentation that said that.

I'm also a bit concerned because there's no way to document that incident, it could easily devolve into he/she-said-he/she said later. I suppose you could show yourself to the next driver - but what if the pax cancels and storms off? Then you have no proof either way. Or what if pax was requested by another person?


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

SafeT said:


> For those who are lucky enough to not have alergies I can tell you that the animal dander and smell does not instantly go away when the animal leaves the car. It can last for days or weeks. You have to shampoo the carpet and wipe all the surfaces. It may still be in your car vents for a while also because the ac pulls everything through the vents. No, I am not taking a dog. I have to spend hours, days, weeks in my car after the dog takes a $5 ride.
> Endless headaches, sinus trouble. No thanks.


Ozium helps quite a bit. It not only freshens the air but sanitizes it too.

SafeT if you were assigned to me for a ride, I would call you first to tell you I had a dog and ask if you had a problem with it. If you said yes, I totally would respect that and cancel the ride and request another ride. I know quite a few people with service dogs and they would do the same thing. Just because we have the right to services with our dogs doesn't mean we don't respect other people and their rights and needs. But then again there are those few that give us all a bad name.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> Just curious... Where does Uber says I have to wait for another driver? I'm happy to but my searching found no public-facing documentation that said that.
> 
> I'm also a bit concerned because there's no way to document that incident, it could easily devolve into he/she-said-he/she said later. I suppose you could show yourself to the next driver - but what if the pax cancels and storms off? Then you have no proof either way. Or what if pax was requested by another person?


5 Star Guy can you answer this?


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FAC said:


> Ozium helps quite a bit. It not only freshens the air but sanitizes it too.
> 
> SafeT if you were assigned to me for a ride, I would call you first to tell you I had a dog and ask if you had a problem with it. If you said yes, I totally would respect that and cancel the ride and request another ride. I know quite a few people with service dogs and they would do the same thing. Just because we have the right to services with our dogs doesn't mean we don't respect other people and their rights and needs. But then again there are those few that give us all a bad name.


And that's how sane people resolve matters in the real world. The problem is when you have insane people that aren't willing to - or are intentionally seeking a gotcha lawsuit. Just because you have a disability that requires you need a service animal, doesn't mean you can't also be insane - or a litigious jerk.

One man in California was responsible for shutting down dozens of businesses. Because he knew the ADA rules so well and intentionally took his wheelchair out wardriving for ADA violations that no other wheelchair user had ever encountered in these businesses - because the businesses had made accommodations for everyone else that this one individual had a problem with. Statutes won out, many of those businesses are gone - many more settled for tens of thousands of dollars (each). It was his day job to put others out of business.

I just want clarity from Uber on the subject. A public-and-posted policy in their help pages that says what to do. That shouldn't be too hard to ask, considering there are millions of people with allergies. This is an issue that happens somewhere on the Uber USA network daily - they should have a clear (public) answer about it.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Just curious... Where does Uber says I have to wait for another driver? I'm happy to but my searching found no public-facing documentation that said that.
> 
> I'm also a bit concerned because there's no way to document that incident, it could easily devolve into he/she-said-he/she said later. I suppose you could show yourself to the next driver - but what if the pax cancels and storms off? Then you have no proof either way. Or what if pax was requested by another person?


It is in their training videos. If you think about it, which I just did after posting all of these above that Travass wants every pax, drivers don't want to get tossed or dinged on their ratings for not taking an ADA dog and people with an ADA dog needs a driver. Travass does not want to get in trouble with ADA dogs, he's now paid 153M in cases against him. It does make sense, plenty of sense. You take the ADA dog or you sit and wait. If you wait, then the pax gets their ride and you don't get reported or dinged.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> Bingo! Thanks for citing statutes that clearly underscore the situation. Totally 100% agree with you.
> 
> Not only did you answer the question - you cited ADA interpretation! Crowdsourcing prevails as usual!
> 
> If you have pet allergies, and drive professionally for Uber, I encourage you to get a blood test. Insurance should cover it - not Uber certainly - but I paid $5 copay for my lab work last year.


The law also states allergies and fear of dog are not valid reason to deny services to people with service dogs. This comes straight from the ADA site. 








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


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FAC said:


> The law also states allergies and fear of dog are not valid reason to deny services to people with service dogs. This comes straight from the ADA site.
> View attachment 37170
> 
> 
> http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


That rule seems aimed at businesses, not enclosed vehicles where a driver is operating heavy machinery. Again, unsafe conditions ADA rules trump that.

It may be a fight, but some ADA lawyer won't want to pick it with me. I'll go bankrupt watching them torch their billable hours on a client they can't get a dime from.

Plus Uber's wait-for-another-driver rule may cure this, or avoid it completely. Sounds like Uber has thought this one through.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

FAC said:


> The law also states allergies and fear of dog are not valid reason to deny services to people with service dogs. This comes straight from the ADA site.
> View attachment 37170
> 
> 
> http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


So for Travass not to get in trouble he set up the rule that you must wait for a driver to take them, not just show up. If they find out you left you get tossed like the guy in the UK and he paid a fine.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

I hate those videos, feel like I'm 15 years old watching training videos at Burger King!

Wish there was a place to download the Uber policies for both riders and drivers


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> That rule seems aimed at businesses, not enclosed vehicles where a driver is operating heavy machinery. Again, unsafe conditions ADA rules trump that.
> 
> It may be a fight, but some ADA lawyer won't want to pick it with me. I'll go bankrupt watching them torch their billable hours on a client they can't get a dime from.


You are public transportation, serving your market. You don't make a reservation like a limo for a wedding.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> So for Travass not to get in trouble he set up the rule that you must wait for a driver to take them, not just show up. If they find out you left you get tossed like the guy in the UK and he paid a fine.


Makes sense, but I watched the training video for my market - this wasn't ever mentioned in the Sac market welcome.

Still leaves open a painful he/she-said-he/she-said hazard later.



5 Star Guy said:


> You are public transportation, serving your market. You don't make a reservation like a limo for a wedding.


Looks like my edit didn't take, but I edited it to say that I agreed with you that Uber's rule probably is ADA compliant. I just couldn't find the video on the Sacramento help site, and it wasn't mentioned in the original training video when I joined.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> That rule seems aimed at businesses, not enclosed vehicles where a driver is operating heavy machinery. Again, unsafe conditions ADA rules trump that.
> 
> It may be a fight, but some ADA lawyer won't want to pick it with me. I'll go bankrupt watching them torch their billable hours on a client they can't get a dime from.
> 
> Plus Uber's wait-for-another-driver rule may cure this, or avoid it completely. Sounds like Uber has thought this one through.


That is why we have the checks and balances. The legislative branch writes the laws and the courts interpret them. To me I wouldn't want to engage in a litigation battle. We are not employees so the individual driver and uber would likely be named in the suit. What do you think the chances are that uber would pop for a drivers legal fees?


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FAC said:


> That is why we have the checks and balances. The legislative branch writes the laws and the courts interpret them. To me I wouldn't want to engage in a litigation battle. We are not employees so the individual driver and uber would likely be named in the suit. What do you think the chances are that uber would pop for a drivers legal fees?


Likely the govt would pursue Uber, not the driver for the poor policy. So would any sue-happy attorney with a brain stem.

Not to get political, but the very fact the administrative interpretations go so far down the rabbit hole, shows that the fourth branch (administrative) has ruined the checks and balances. Cost of gridlock, and fall of society, yadda, yadda.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> Likely the govt would pursue Uber, not the driver for the poor policy. So would any attorney with a brain stem.


Of course they will. Uber has deeper pockets. But that doesn't mean you wouldn't also be named in the suit. I wouldn't wish litigation on my worst enemy. But I guess we all have to pick our own battles. If I didn't want a service dog in my car I would just wait for another driver to show up. The only reason I would decline the ride is if the dog was aggressive towards mine. But that's a very unlikely scenario. Service dogs are typically well trained. I had mine trained by a professional trainer bc Westies are quite good at training their humans.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Yeah - if it comes up I'll wait for the next driver, like I mentioned in my OP - bit of clairvoyance there since I had no idea that was policy.

I'm mostly miffed Uber doesn't have it spelled out in a post. I still am not sure the video that states this is even on my city help portal.

If Uber was named as a co-defendant, they'd pay driver's fees. That's part of how the insurance was tailored. Last thing Uber wants is a suicidal defendant that puts all the blame on Uber... even if they go BK in the process.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> The law also states allergies and fear of dog are not valid reason to deny services to people with service dogs. This comes straight from the ADA site.
> View attachment 37170
> 
> 
> http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


That is from 2011, the link I posted is from 2015.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> Yeah - if it comes up I'll wait for the next driver, like I mentioned in my OP - bit of clairvoyance there since I had no idea that was policy.
> 
> I'm mostly miffed Uber doesn't have it spelled out in a post. I still am not sure the video that states this is even on my city help portal.
> 
> If Uber was named as a co-defendant, they'd pay driver's fees. That's part of how the insurance was tailored. Last thing Uber wants is a suicidal defendant that puts all the blame on Uber... even if they go BK in the process.


Now instead of saying going postal we can say going uber.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> That is from 2011, the link I posted is from 2015.


No I believe both links are part of revised clarification from the justice department due to so much confusion on the Ada laws. But I could be wrong. The ADA laws are confusing. Even when they try to clarify the laws. Kinda like the new deactivation policy uber released today. Really cleared things up for drivers (hope you can read the sarcasm in that last part)


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> No both links are part of revised clarification from the justice department due to so much confusion on the Ada laws. Both documents were released at the same time. Confusing matters even worse. Kinda like the new deactivation policy uber released today. Really cleared things up for drivers (hope you can read the sarcasm in that last part)


Sarcasm is my middle name.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> I just want clarity from Uber on the subject. A public-and-posted policy in their help pages that says what to do. That shouldn't be too hard to ask, considering there are millions of people with allergies. This is an issue that happens somewhere on the Uber USA network daily - they should have a clear (public) answer about it.


I want $50 million bucks from Travis but I have as good of chance of getting that from Travis as you do getting clarification. Uber lives and breathes being vague. Did you read their clarified deactivation policy released today? I'm more confused today than I was yesterday without one.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Likely the govt would pursue Uber, not the driver for the poor policy. So would any sue-happy attorney with a brain stem.


Yes sue the deeper pocket forca settlement, not the driver in so much debt they voluntarily enslaved themselves to Uber master.

Plus what stupid corporate company the size of Uber uses YouTube as its primary source for policy training!?
No easily found policy documents anywhere I've looked. It's like we're working for a $50 billion dollar taco truck! (and no it's not racist, just the most common food truck, that unfortunately never moves from next to the same liquor store)
It's ridiculously unprofession, not to have easily downloadable PDF's!


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

The video I saw was one of the last ones, I believe there is a list of topics so you don't have to view each one in order. It is your job to know every law, regulation, rule and Travass isn't allowed to explain every detail. That is the issue, but I did see the video and it must be in every market. There is no he said, she said, you are waiting for the driver to take the dog. They will go after you not Travass. I posted a link above it just happened. You will be tossed immediately and this guy was also fined. Take it or leave it, believe it or don't but it's on you like everything else.


----------



## cannonball7 (Feb 18, 2016)

I wonder if we can require that the service animal to ride in the trunk?


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

No, I already made that joke!


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

FAC said:


> Another Uber Driver, yes I'm keenly aware of the laws and I do get outspoken when my rights are trampled on; but I also do my best not to trample on other people as well.


You are a little different from many "similarly situated". We seem to have an oversupply, here, of those who think that the world owes them something due to their condition. You have mentioned, in previous posts, that you are aware of those types and that you are not one of them. If everyone were a little more considerate, the world would, indeed, be a much better place.



FAC said:


> I'm deathly allergic to cats and wouldn't want one in my car.


I am not allergic to cats. I do not like them, but I will haul them. GF is a Tweety Bird nut, so she has stuffed Tweety Birds not only everywhere in the house, but, also in the cab, the UberX car, the other car and the DeSoto. Sometimes, when someone gets into the car with a cat (always, they have a box for their cats), the customer will ask if the cat is allright. I tell the passenger that it is allright with me, but the cat might want to stay in its box as GF's Tweety Birds are up front. Everyone knows that Tweety Bird is extremely hazardous to the health of _*bad ol' puddy 'tats*_.



FAC said:


> But then again there are those few that give us all a bad name.


...........as you have mentioned in more than one post. We have an oversupply of the types that render "bad names", here, but what do you expect in a Metropolitan Area where every third person is a lawyer? In fact, the first time that I had to deal with a guide dog complaint against my company as an Official, it was one of those types. She tried to blame the allergic driver's refusal to carry her for her being late for an appointment. It was obvious from what she wrote in her complaint letter that she was late even before she called for the first cab. Further, she admitted in her letter that the second cab, which did carry her, arrived five minutes after the first driver refused to haul her. I knew this particular complainant. She was a Professional Claimant who was on the garbage list of more than one claims adjuster in this area.



HoldenDriver said:


> One man in California was responsible for shutting down dozens of businesses. Because he knew the ADA rules so well and intentionally took his wheelchair out wardriving for ADA violations that no other wheelchair user had ever encountered in these businesses - because the businesses had made accommodations for everyone else that this one individual had a problem with. Statutes won out, many of those businesses are gone - many more settled for tens of thousands of dollars (each). It was his day job to put others out of business.


In the Insurance Business, we call this a "Professional Claimant". As a former Official of both a cab company and a cab insurance company, I have dealt with more than a few of these. There are far more of them out here than most people would think.



HoldenDriver said:


> It may be a fight, but some ADA lawyer won't want to pick it with me. I'll go bankrupt watching them torch their billable hours on a client they can't get a dime from.
> 
> Plus Uber's wait-for-another-driver rule may cure this, or avoid it completely. Sounds like Uber has thought this one through


Most of these bottom feeding lawyers will not even take such a case if they can not identify a potential defendant who can pay up. If you were the only one that could be sued, the lawyer would not even touch it.

Uber wants to avoid being held responsible for a driver's misdeeds. Policies such as this will go far toward getting them out of the case, or, at least, provide them with a means to settle quickly and cheaply. If Uber can do that, it will leave only the driver in the case, which will force it to close quickly, as usually, the driver has nothing to pay.



5 Star Guy said:


> So for Travass not to get in trouble he set up the rule that you must wait for a driver to take them, not just show up. If they find out you left you get tossed like the guy in the UK and he paid a fine.


This helps the TNC to avoid being held responsible for the customer and the drivers' misdeeds. The TNC has in place a policy to sanction what is considered misbehaviour on the part of the driver.



Fireguy50 said:


> I hate those videos, feel like I'm 15 years old watching training videos at Burger King!


AROTFLMAOWIPMP My laundry bills are going to go sky high if you keep up with this..



FAC said:


> What do you think the chances are that uber would pop for a drivers legal fees?


It would if it helps to protect the company. My cab company has done similar more than once.



HoldenDriver said:


> Likely the govt would pursue Uber, not the driver for the poor policy. So would any sue-happy attorney with a brain stem.


^^^^^^^^^\/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/



FAC said:


> Of course they will. Uber has deeper pockets. But that doesn't mean you wouldn't also be named in the suit.


..............but do keep in mind that once Uber is out, either by settling separately, quickly and cheaply, the case will end, for the reasons mentioned above by HoldenDriver



HoldenDriver said:


> If Uber was named as a co-defendant, they'd pay driver's fees. That's part of how the insurance was tailored. Last thing Uber wants is a suicidal defendant that puts all the blame on Uber... even if they go BK in the process.


Correct. Uber would spring for the driver's legal fees if there is benefit to Uber for doing so. You have cited some of the cases where Uber might benefit.



FAC said:


> Uber lives and breathes being vague.


Any business does. Their lawyers tell them to be vague. If you are specific, you can be held to it. It is expensive to be held to anything.



Fireguy50 said:


> It's like we're working for a $50 billion dollar taco truck!


Would you please stop this?!?!?? My laundry bills are going to bankrupt me!!!!!


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Would you please stop this?!?!?? My laundry bills are going to bankrupt me!!!!!


Internet sarcasm is hard to read.
Am I in trouble? Or mediocre funny?
Are you coming on to me?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> funny?


This.

ROTFLMAOWIPMP

Everyone knows that for which the first eight letters stand.

WIPMP=While I pee my pants.

If I keep up the last five, I will have to spend large amounts of money washing my pants and shorts.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

sorry about your pants


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

On the phone with ADA

Uber does not have ADA Title 3 requirements at this time, they (ADA) have nothing conclusive that directly says yes or no an Uber driver must take a service animal. By conclusive they mean a complaint or court case that has been decided.

ADA Title 3 covers private entities. She said this is an interesting question because Uber does not own the car the driver does, it's their private car and as a private citizen you are not bound by ADA Title 3.

The ADA is at the point trying to determine if Uber is a covered private entity under ADA Title 3. Again the car ownership issue comes up, unlike taxis, buses and other private hire companies Uber does not own cars.

She was surprised to hear about Ubers requirement that we wait with a pax & service animal until they get another driver. She agreed this didn't make sense as it puts a driver with allergies at risk. She also asked how Uber worked in regards to training, to which I promptly laughed and said they leave the drivers to figure everything out on their own.

Two recommended readings she suggested are:

ADA revised requirements: service animals
http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

FAQ about service animals and the ADA
http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html

There ya have it folks straight from the ADA. As it stands under their current rules drivers are not required to pick up a pax with a service animal.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> There ya have it folks straight from the ADA. As it stands under their current rules drivers are not required to pick up a pax with a service animal.


And won't until Uber is taken to court for a definitive ruling.
*Ambulance chasing attorney's unite!*


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> And won't until Uber is taken to court for a definitive ruling.
> *Ambulance chasing attorney's unite!*


It's going to come down to the argument of car ownership. The woman I spoke to said it herself, knowing Uber they'll claim they're not an ADA Title 3 entity because they don't own the cars.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> On the phone with ADA
> 
> Uber does not have ADA Title 3 requirements at this time, they (ADA) have nothing conclusive that directly says yes or no an Uber driver must take a service animal. By conclusive they mean a complaint or court case that has been decided.
> 
> ...


Geez just adds more confusion. Clearly the person has no idea what Travass is and adds more to the gray area of if this is a taxi or not. I go by the safe side, the guy was just fined and tossed yesterday and I did see the video. I would say to call them again and speak with someone knowledgeable and not rely on someone who knows less than you do, for anything.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> It's going to come down to the argument of car ownership. The woman I spoke to said it herself, knowing Uber they'll claim they're not an ADA Title 3 entity because they don't own the cars.


Exactly, the driver is at fault, not Travass, just like the other rules and regulations and laws. It is on you. I don't see a way around it, you must wait for the driver or you are screwed.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> Exactly, the driver is at fault, not Travass, just like the other rules and regulations and laws. It is on you. I don't see a way around it, you must wait for the driver or you are screwed.


But as a private citizen in your private car you are not required by ADA law to take service animals, a wheelchair pax, or any pax needing assistance under ADA laws.

That's the gray area, rideshare/private car. This is why currently Uber is not an ADA Title 3 entity, they're a "rideshare" company connecting private citizens for "shared rides."


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Beur said:


> The ADA is at the point trying to determine if Uber is a covered private entity under ADA Title 3. Again the car ownership issue comes up, unlike taxis, buses and other private hire companies Uber does not own cars.


It is not always the case that the taxi company owns its cabs. Here, while most of the cab companies own some cabs and rent them to drivers, in most cases, the majority of the drivers own their cabs. There are exceptions, but in most companies, most of the cabs affiliated with the company are privately owned. This applies to the City, only, mind you. In the suburbs, most of the cabs are company owned, but the drivers rent them, thus are independent contractors. I own my cab. I choose to affiliate with a company.

There were periods when the company of which I was an Official did not own any cabs. All of the cabs in the colour scheme were privately owned. There were some people who maintained rental fleets, but, the company itself did not own those cabs.

In the cases of most limousine companies here, the company owns the limousines, although some limousine companies do contract with private owners.

I do understand that is some places, the companies own all of the cabs and rent them out to drivers. Further, I do understand that in some places, the company owns all of the cabs and that the drivers are employees of the company and receive either an hourly wage or a meter-split. The concept of tipping cab drivers originated when cab drivers were employees of companies or received a meter-split. It persists even in markets where the drivers keep one-hundred per-cent of the fares and pay rent or company fees out of their gross receipts.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> Geez just adds more confusion. Clearly the person has no idea what Travass is and adds more to the gray area of if this is a taxi or not. I go by the safe side, the guy was just fined and tossed yesterday and I did see the video. I would say to call them again and speak with someone knowledgeable and not rely on someone who knows less than you do, for anything.


You're more than welcome to call them yourself and hear the answers for yourself. (800) 514-0301 be sure to tell the ADA specialist that answers you want to speak to someone knowledgeable.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> But as a private citizen in your private car you are not required by ADA law to take service animals, a wheelchair pax, or any pax needing assistance under ADA laws.
> 
> That's the gray area, rideshare/private car. This is why currently Uber is not an ADA Title 3 entity, they're a "rideshare" company connecting private citizens for "shared rides."


The person you spoke with is misinformed, that's the problem. Doing this is the public, not a limo for a private wedding.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Good luck being a taxi and not taking a disabled person, no matter who owns the car.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> It is not always the case that the taxi company owns its cabs. Here, while most of the cab companies own some cabs and rent them to drivers, in most cases, the majority of the drivers own their cabs. There are exceptions, but in most companies, most of the cabs affiliated with the company are privately owned. This applies to the City, only, mind you. In the suburbs, most of the cabs are company owned, but the drivers rent them, thus are independent contractors. I own my cab. I choose to affiliate with a company.
> 
> There were periods when the company of which I was an Official did not own any cabs. All of the cabs in the colour scheme were privately owned. There were some people who maintained rental fleets, but, the company itself did not own those cabs.
> 
> ...


Just putting out there what the ADA specialist told me the issues are with Uber in regards to classification as an ADA Title 3 entity.

I would suggest you all call to speak with a specialists to get the answers to your questions. (800) 514-0301


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> The person you spoke with is misinformed, that's the problem. Doing this is the public, not a limo for a private wedding.


Well Mr 5 Star Guy why don't you enlighten us with the correct information seeing how you're more informed than the ADA specialist. Or, you can make the call and return here with the results of your conversation the same as I did.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I did a little more digging. As per the usual Travass doesn't want to be regulated to be required to take disabled people or he will be known as the business for the disabled, when he wants to believe he is a technology company, not a transportation company. There have been several law suits and and local regulation, a lot of chatter from May 2015 for some reason. I tried to find intel after those dates and no I didn't call the ADA.

What I determined, which is why I didn't call them, is that it is on the driver, as I stated early on. Travass may or may not get regulated, you are still an independent contractor who must follow the rules when transporting someone in the public, not a friend or hired for a wedding. While you do not have to take a pax who is disabled, the burden is on you to get the pax a driver who will take them as again, I said I saw in Travass' training video. This way it's not Travass' problem, like everything else. You can choose to follow that or don't like anything else on here. You will be tossed if someone complains and if your city gets involved fined. Not worth it in my book, maybe yours.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> I did a little more digging. As per the usual Travass doesn't want to be regulated to be required to take disabled people or he will be known as the business for the disabled, when he wants to believe he is a technology company, not a transportation company. There have been several law suits and and local regulation, a lot of chatter from May 2015 for some reason. I tried to find intel after those dates and no I didn't call the ADA.
> 
> What I determined, which is why I didn't call them, is that it is on the driver, as I stated early on. Travass may or may not get regulated, you are still an independent contractor who must follow the rules when transporting someone in the public, not a friend or hired for a wedding. While you do not have to take a pax who is disabled, the burden is on you to get the pax a driver who will take them as again, I said I saw in Travass' training video. This way it's not Travass' problem, like everything else. You can choose to follow that or don't like anything else on here. You will be tossed if someone complains and if your city gets involved fined. Not worth it in my book, maybe yours.


So instead of calling the people who deal with ADA laws everyday, you did some googling and used the Uber video, which I've never seen and can't find to develop your own hypothesis of what the correct procedure is. You're using your hypothesis to spread misinformation and fear among Uber drivers.

Me thinks you like to argue for the sake of arguing. SMDH


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> So instead of calling the people who deal with ADA laws everyday, you did some googling and used the Uber video, which I've never seen and can't find to develop your own hypothesis of what the correct procedure is. You're using your hypothesis to spread misinformation and fear among Uber drivers.
> 
> Me thinks you like to argue for the sake of arguing. SMDH


It's very simple. You either take the ADA dog or you don't. You are an independent contractor and must know all of the laws, policies, procedures, regulations, all of that. If you don't take the ADA dog then it isn't Travass' problem, it is yours. You will be tossed as others have, one was yesterday for this so no, I'm not using any hypothesis, spreading misinformation or fear, I am stating facts, like I always do. I don't argue for the sake of arguing, I want to be sure drivers realize the rules here. Travass put it on drivers to handle so you can add this to the list. It's very simple and didn't need to take 6 pages to explain. Now you know.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Holy carp (_I said carp... carp_)... way to go Beur!

I suspect the Uber video that says we have to wait with pax may only be posted in markets where there is a state requirement. That would explain why I can't find it on the Sacramento help portal. _If it is there, please let me know!_

*Still, I'm not taking any chances.* If this comes up, I will wait with pax for another driver, and go offline until then, unless pax declines/refuses.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> It's very simple. You either take the ADA dog or you don't. You are an independent contractor and must know all of the laws, policies, procedures, regulations, all of that. If you don't take the ADA dog then it isn't Travass' problem, it is yours. You will be tossed as others have, one was yesterday for this so no, I'm not using any hypothesis, spreading misinformation or fear, I am stating facts, like I always do. I don't argue for the sake of arguing, I want to be sure drivers realize the rules here. Travass put it on drivers to handle so you can add this to the list. It's very simple and didn't need to take 6 pages to explain. Now you know.


Why do you keep bringing up the UK driver who was bounced as if it's a US driver, different countries different laws. Wow you have fear mongering down pat.

As HoldenDriver has pointed out this video you claim to have watched that covers ADA is not in the Sacremento nor the Palm Springs driver portal, which likely means (hypothesis) it's not in the driver portal for all California.

Unlike your hypothesis, the information I posted came straight from the ADA, and ADA specialist answered my questions, I posted the response here. You claimed they were misinformed, yet have yet to offer up intelligent researched counter arguments. Sorry Uber video and a Google search don't count as intelligent research.

As I said before call the ADA as I did with your questions, then return here with the answers your received.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> Why do you keep bringing up the UK driver who was bounced as if it's a US driver, different countries different laws. Wow you have fear mongering down pat.
> 
> As HoldenDriver has pointed out this video you claim to have watched that covers ADA is not in the Sacremento nor the Palm Springs driver portal, which likely means (hypothesis) it's not in the driver portal for all California.
> 
> ...


Your basis is somehow you are exempt. I don't see that, the only thing I see are several disabled people suing Travass. He tosses drivers and doesn't address the issue. I'll go dig some more, like other six page plus topics I do when I have time or get frustrated.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> Your basis is somehow you are exempt. I don't see that, the only thing I see are several disabled people suing Travass. He tosses drivers and doesn't address the issue. I'll go dig some more, like other six page plus topics I do when I have time or get frustrated.


Well 5 Star Guy you are wrong about my basis, if you read through the thread you would have seen I'll gladly take dogs over people any day.

What my posts are about is dispelling the mis-information people like you are putting forth as gospel. Why won't you call the ADA with your questions, afraid you'll be proven wrong?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Beur said:


> I'm sure the rules are different in Europe compared to the states. I'll take the time to call the ADA line this week to get a definitive answer on allergies and service dogs and Uber drivers.


Actually, they're generally MORE stringent here than anywhere else.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Fireguy50 said:


> 3. Can it ride in the trunk?
> 
> Don't care who you are, that's funny!


Er, that driver got canned.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> You are a little different from many "similarly situated". We seem to have an oversupply, here, of those who think that the world owes them something due to their condition. You have mentioned, in previous posts, that you are aware of those types and that you are not one of them. If everyone were a little more considerate, the world would, indeed, be a much better place.


We have an oversupply of people with or without disabilities who believe the world owes them something. There are some African Americans that feel entitled because their great great great grandparents were enslaved. There are the wealthy who don't think their sh!t doesn't smell. The Native Americans do have a right to complain we did screw them and haven't made it right. But getting upset over team names like the Redskins or Braves? There are the milennials who i really hate driving believing they are entitled to everything. But I guess it wasn't much different when I was their age as a generation xer.

Point being unfortunately there are some really narissictic people out there we just have to deal with as drivers.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> No, in fact, the Taxicab Commission rulemaking is recent. All that it did was legally enshrine unwritten policy. I battled those cases before the Human Rights Office years back. It is funny that no one there ever pointed out to me that the ADA had language that stated that "allergy was not an excuse". In fact, on another topic on this subject on this very forum, I got egg on my face because I was going on my experience in D.C. rather than actually reading the law.
> 
> Still, D.C. does allow allergic cab drivers to refuse to haul animals, regardless of the animal's purpose.


It may be in part because there is ONE business in that case, which has a policy for dealing with those cases, and the disabled person can be guaranteed another cab (since there are actual human beings sending one out and able to make sure the replacement will take the animal). Also, the cab business does not want to be sued, and will make sure of this.

With Uber, the person has no guarantee another car will come, and that they will take their animal. They could ping 10 drivers in a row, or there may not be any available in the suburbs, besides the one they were able to get who is refusing to take them.

A cab company can pull a driver from wherever it needs to on order to cover that disabled person. Uber has no plan in place, it is all on the driver who has arrived and the customer. There is NO guarantee the customer will get another ride.

Since Uber then will simply deactivate that driver and wash it's hands of the entire affair, (being only a technology company), it is all on the individual driver to find a replacement ride. And of course that may not be possible. So the driver is on the hook.

This is one place where not having a phone number becomes an issue.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Holy carp (_I said carp... carp_)... way to go Beur!
> 
> I suspect the Uber video that says we have to wait with pax may only be posted in markets where there is a state requirement. That would explain why I can't find it on the Sacramento help portal. _If it is there, please let me know!_
> 
> *Still, I'm not taking any chances.* If this comes up, I will wait with pax for another driver, and go offline until then, unless pax declines/refuses.


I would offer the same treatment I give drunks

Peaceful ride home
Back of a Police car
Back of an Ambulance
Except I would offer these options

Peaceful ride home with the animal
Call a regular taxi
Professional Wheelchair Accessible Van (typically offered by private Ambulance companies)
I wouldn't recommend doing it just for the sake of an argument, or get 15 minutes of fame on YouTube or The Supreme Court!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> On the phone with ADA
> 
> Uber does not have ADA Title 3 requirements at this time, they (ADA) have nothing conclusive that directly says yes or no an Uber driver must take a service animal. By conclusive they mean a complaint or court case that has been decided.
> 
> ...


Thanks for following up on this! 

Pretty awesome of you to take the time to call them and share the information. Even though it's still gray area until some a$$hole decides to make an issue of it and wants to sue someone.

Finally we can put the issue to rest and when new posts come up about the issue we can direct them to your post.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Thanks for following up on this!
> 
> Pretty awesome of you to take the time to call them and share the information. Even though it's still gray area until some a$$hole decides to make an issue of it and wants to sue someone.
> 
> Finally we can put the issue to rest and when new posts come up about the issue we can direct them to your post.


You're right it's going to take either the ADA classifying Uber under Title 3 or someone filing a complaint. As I said in an earlier post, this doesn't just apply just to service dogs but all people requiring assistance under ADA laws. A lawsuit/complaint is coming, it's just a matter of when.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> It's going to come down to the argument of car ownership. The woman I spoke to said it herself, knowing Uber they'll claim they're not an ADA Title 3 entity because they don't own the cars.


Well it's been 5 years without a lawsuit on this matter, it's just only a matter of time.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I called who I thought was the local Boston office since the training video was in my market, for some reason. Apparently I got transferred to CA, there are ten ADA centers in the US so there are eight others somewhere. The gentleman I spoke with said there are several cases in court going on now and that the verdicts will help determine the regulation. The Department of Justice runs the ADA, so that will be interesting.  I called the local number and left a message. I was laughing leaving the message, oh no not another one calling about Travass. 

I have no idea why the video is not in every market but the fact that it is in mine is good enough evidence that the issue was addressed. There are cities now that want Travass to shuttle disabled people so their city shuttle bus system can save money, which as I'm sure you know Travass is against.

I think the fear for Travass is where does it stop, will we need to know CPR like a flight attendant, need to be able to lift heavy objects like a wheel chair in order to be an independent contractor or simply put the ADA dog in the back and call it a day.

I think everyone can read this thread and decide for themselves. I will report back if I hear anything different.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Beur said:


> Just putting out there what the ADA specialist told me the issues are with Uber in regards to classification as an ADA Title 3 entity.
> 
> I would suggest you all call to speak with a specialists to get the answers to your questions. (800) 514-0301


What I get is that uber is not on the hook because they claim to not be a transportation company (IF you accept that). However, the argument that you're driving a "private" car, IF IT FLIES, would also make YOU not liable. Good luck making that argument when you've transported 20 other people that day for payment. The person you talked to is still confused by "rideshare" and it's ACTUAL definition. (If you had a car pool to work, no you woukd not need to take your disabled workmates with you, but regardless of what Uber calls this, your car is NOT a private vehicle anymore).


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> You're right it's going to take either the ADA classifying Uber under Title 3 or someone filing a complaint. As I said in an earlier post, this doesn't just apply just to service dogs but all people requiring assistance under ADA laws. A lawsuit/complaint is coming, it's just a matter of when.


It really sucks for the drivers with allergies. I wouldn't allow a cat in my car under any circumstances so I sympathize with drivers with dog allergies.

Unfortunately it's not just some disabled people who feel entitled they are owed something. In just about any group or race or religion there are the few that feel the same way too giving the rest a bad name.

I know there are a lot of people like me with real disabilities who do their best to live active normal lives consciously trying not to make their disability someone else's problem. Yeah sometimes we need a little extra like wheelchair ramps or service dogs. But most the people I know with service dogs are like me. They would never want to harm another especially with allergies with their dogs. I think it's the ones who fake it who make the biggest deal. Or the ones who cannot come to resolution to the fact they are disabled (like the guy in California) so they want to make everyone else miserable.

My hope is that no uber or Lyft driver is put in this position.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> What I get is that uber is not on the hook because they claim to not be a transportation company (IF you accept that). However, the argument that you're driving a "private" car, IF IT FLIES, would also make YOU not liable. Good luck making that argument when you've transported 20 other people that day for payment. The person you talked to is still confused by "rideshare" and it's ACTUAL definition. (If you had a car pool to work, no you woukd not need to take your disabled workmates with you, but regardless of what Uber calls this, your car is NOT a private vehicle anymore).


Again if you have an issue with the answers I was given, I encourage you to call the ADA yourself. (800) 514-0301


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

FAC said:


> Thanks for following up on this!
> 
> Pretty awesome of you to take the time to call them and share the information. Even though it's still gray area until some a$$hole decides to make an issue of it and wants to sue someone.
> 
> Finally we can put the issue to rest and when new posts come up about the issue we can direct them to your post.


Uber has already had one suit where a blind person had their dog put in the trunk unbeknownst to them.

This is not all about "entitled people". It's about people who really need their service animal having it mistreated or being left REPEATEDLY on the side of the road by drivers who have NO issues with allergies but simply don't want an animal in their car.

Uber drivers (read this forum) are worse about this than taxis (and this has been an ongoing problem with taxis) because they have the attitude it's their car and they can do anything they want.

There are entitled people but the truly disabled who need that service animal to do the things others take for granted are NOT them.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> I have no idea why the video is not in every market but the fact that it is in mine is good enough evidence that the issue was addressed.
> .


I don't know why Uber doesn't set up a training portal with all their videos with PDFs in one place so all drivers know where to look for the information and training they need.

I'm so grateful for this site because I've gotten invaluable advice on so many different things. I couldn't imagine driving without the helpful information here.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

FAC said:


> It really sucks for the drivers with allergies. I wouldn't allow a cat in my car under any circumstances so I sympathize with drivers with dog allergies.
> 
> Unfortunately it's not just some disabled people who feel entitled they are owed something. In just about any group or race or religion there are the few that feel the same way too giving the rest a bad name.
> 
> ...


I think many of the disabled people who end up bringing suit do it not the first or second time they are left on the side if the road because the driver refuses their dog, but after multiple instances. At so.e point, enough is enough.

If you read the history of guide dogs, this has been an ongoing problem for blind people. Now that there are service dogs that don't necessarily look like service dogs it's hitting those folks too. Eventually people get tired of it.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> It really sucks for the drivers with allergies. I wouldn't allow a cat in my car under any circumstances so I sympathize with drivers with dog allergies.
> 
> Unfortunately it's not just some disabled people who feel entitled they are owed something. In just about any group or race or religion there are the few that feel the same way too giving the rest a bad name.
> 
> ...


What if my cat is a service cat? 

As I've said numerous times my posts were intended to clarify the mis-information and fear mongering going on. Me personally I'll take a dog or other differently abled person over a pax any day of the week. Many disabled are more appreciative than the fully abled, except for those who are newly afflicted.

I had one guy become offended when I explained the Uber assist/access program to him and how the drivers were "trained" by Uber. Ok we all know the training is laughable.

After he complained about all the costs associated with his new disability, one of them being transportation costs, I let him know that our local government provides free transportation he chewed me a new one. You just can't win with some people.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Uber has already had one suit where a blind person had their dog put in the trunk unbeknownst to them


OMG!!! Are you serious that a driver out their dog in the trunk. I don't have words to explain how upsetting that is.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> There are entitled people but the truly disabled who need that service animal to do the things others take for granted are NOT them.


I have to partly disagree. There are some truly disabled people who have yet come to resolution with their disability so they want to make everyone else miserable.

But for the most part I believe you are correct.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> What I get is that uber is not on the hook because they claim to not be a transportation company (IF you accept that). However, the argument that you're driving a "private" car, IF IT FLIES, would also make YOU not liable. Good luck making that argument when you've transported 20 other people that day for payment. The person you talked to is still confused by "rideshare" and it's ACTUAL definition. (If you had a car pool to work, no you woukd not need to take your disabled workmates with you, but regardless of what Uber calls this, your car is NOT a private vehicle anymore).


Bingo, we have a winner! The problem is the plaintiffs are suing Travass, looking for regulation and money. The state regulations Travass has had to address should've included this area. All Travass has to do is look at plenty of buildings, street corners, without ramps, buildings that don't have elevators, it's not only his fault, it's everywhere.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> What if my cat is a service cat?


According to the ADA only dogs and mini horses can be service animals. The rest an be emotional support animals.

I can't wait for the day someone with a mini horse hails a ride!


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Your vehicles Gross Vehicle Weight Rating could get you out of that situation


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

FAC said:


> I don't know why Uber doesn't set up a training portal with all their videos with PDFs in one place so all drivers know where to look for the information and training they need.
> 
> I'm so grateful for this site because I've gotten invaluable advice on so many different things. I couldn't imagine driving without the helpful information here.


Travass can't train too much or you are an employee.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> According to the ADA only dogs and mini horses can be service animals. The rest an be emotional support animals.
> 
> I can't wait for the day someone with a mini horse hails a ride!


I'd hate to have a mini horse have an accident in my car and have to clean that up. Hopefully they order an XL or an SUV!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

I'm intrigued to see how this plays out. If indeed there are lawsuits curious if it would set a national or state precedent. 

This is just another issue that could possibly change our status as employees.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> Travass can't train too much or you are an employee.


Then the micromanagement texts and deactivation threats need to stop as well.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> I'd hate to have a mini horse have an accident in my car and have to clean that up. Hopefully they order an XL or an SUV!


Come on mini horses are cool! They smell so much better than dogs. And completely housebroken. Why wouldn't you want bragging rights to say you transported a service horse?!


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> Then the micromanagement texts and deactivation threats need to stop as well.


I think now that the employee case is closed some of this training will change. The service businesses who went out of business using Travass' model are saying now that people are not employees it will be easier to operate.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> I think now that the employee case is closed some of this training will change. The service businesses who went out of business using Travass' model are saying now that people are not employees it will be easier to operate.


Except it's not closed at all. The court is already freaking out over the number of settlement objections. Teamsters is getting involved and pushing the California EDD case, where Labor Commission already ruled hourly/incentive drivers as employees.

Heck, even one law firm asked the judge to sanction Uber for that post, where Travis inferred that the settlement was already in effect. It isn't. At all.

I'll be in court at the fairness hearing, objecting to the settlement before the judge. And even if we lose, the EDD case is headed to court afterwards. Not settled. At all.


----------



## FormerUber (Sep 29, 2015)

What benefit is there to having the driver who declined transport of a service animal wait with the PAX until a replacement driver arrives? Emotional support? UBER is the platform connecting drivers with PAX, drivers don't perform that service!


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FormerUber said:


> What benefit is there to having the driver who declined transport of a service animal wait with the PAX until a replacement driver arrives? Emotional support? UBER is the platform connecting drivers with PAX, drivers don't perform that service!


Because if ADA Title 3 does apply, then Uber did not break off interaction with the pax while the 2nd driver is en route. No denial/refusal of service, just delays for a safe driver to become available - least impact to disabled person possible. The driver is also protected because Uber is continuously involved, and nobody can claim the first driver was profiting since he/she is stuck waiting for 2nd driver during that time.

Also it allows the 2nd driver to serve as a witness that the first driver followed protocol. Only risk here is if pax refuses to wait for 2nd driver and storms off, then later claims you didn't follow the law.

It's well thought out, actually. I just think Uber needs to properly inform drivers of the policy, since probably tens of thousands of Uber drivers could qualify under documented allergies.


----------



## FormerUber (Sep 29, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Because if ADA Title 3 does apply, then Uber did not break off interaction with the pax while the 2nd driver is en route. No denial/refusal of service, just delays for a safe driver to become available - least impact to disabled person possible. The driver is also protected because Uber is continuously involved, and nobody can claim the first driver was profiting since he/she is stuck waiting for 2nd driver during that time.
> 
> It's well thought out, actually. I just think Uber needs to properly inform drivers of the policy, since probably tens of thousands of Uber drivers could qualify under documented allergies.


Having the declining driver wait with the PAX neither increases or decreases the amount of the delay. I don't see where having the first driver wait with the PAX helps the PAX in any tangible way.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

FormerUber said:


> Having the declining driver wait with the PAX neither increases or decreases the amount of the delay. I don't see where having the first driver wait with the PAX helps the PAX in any tangible way.


It's all about perception. Perception is reality.


----------



## FormerUber (Sep 29, 2015)

FAC said:


> It's all about perception. Perception is reality.


No, reality is reality. Perceptions are only perceptions - clouded by personal bias.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

FormerUber said:


> Having the declining driver wait with the PAX neither increases or decreases the amount of the delay. I don't see where having the first driver wait with the PAX helps the PAX in any tangible way.


Reading between the lines, you're supposed to assuage the pax while the 2nd driver is en route. If someone needs a service animal, they may require assistance requesting the 2nd driver (say, they're blind and another person helped them request the first driver).

Is it required? I doubt it, legally... but like I said in my OP, I would do it because it's the right thing to do.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Beur said:


> What if my cat is a service cat?
> 
> As I've said numerous times my posts were intended to clarify the mis-information and fear mongering going on. Me personally I'll take a dog or other differently abled person over a pax any day of the week. Many disabled are more appreciative than the fully abled, except for those who are newly afflicted.
> 
> ...


Service animals are only dogs per the ADA. Read the guidelines someone posted earlier. I think.thry made some sort of new guideline for miniature horses, but those wouldn't fit in a car anyway, so not an issue.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

HoldenDriver said:


> Except it's not closed at all. The court is already freaking out over the number of settlement objections. Teamsters is getting involved and pushing the California EDD case, where Labor Commission already ruled hourly/incentive drivers as employees.
> 
> Heck, even one law firm asked the judge to sanction Uber for that post, where Travis inferred that the settlement was already in effect. It isn't. At all.
> 
> I'll be in court at the fairness hearing, objecting to the settlement before the judge. And even if we lose, the EDD case is headed to court afterwards. Not settled. At all.


The problem is that this kind of sh** (classifying employees as contractors to save money) has been going on a long time. There just hasn't been a 70 billion (I say that tongue in cheek btw) company doing it to so many people so blatantly for so long.

The whole system needs to be fixed. Just as with most Uber drivers, many folks have been called contractors but treated as employees, but didn't know they were being screwed. Most of their employers didn't even go to the lengths Uber has to prove their employees are contractors, but the folks didn't know the law, or, like us, were stuck needing the job, and there were many others in line, ready to replace them.

In the end, there should hopefully be some clarification of classifications, or new ones, and it will be clearer to everyone where they stand and what they are owed in the way of benefits (or freedom).


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Service animals are only dogs per the ADA. Read the guidelines someone posted earlier. I think.thry made some sort of new guideline for miniature horses, but those wouldn't fit in a car anyway, so not an issue.


OMG do you not recognize sarcasm? Geez


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> In the end, there should hopefully be some clarification of classifications, or new ones, and it will be clearer to everyone where they stand and what they are owed in the way of benefits (or freedom).


I don't mind the independent contractor status. I just want the same deal Lyft drivers got (in their settlement). No more deactivations for low ratings. Deactivations due to complaints have to be vetted and justified.

If I have to align with a union to get that (_insert vomit here_), then so be it. To make the most profit, I need an electric car - and that means needing to know I won't get kicked to the curb by a set of drunk 1-star ratings.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> There are cities now that want Travass to shuttle disabled people so their city shuttle bus system can save money, which as I'm sure you know Travass is against..


Shortly after Uber launched here with Uber Black, only, T. Kalanick was testifying before the D.C. City Council. There was a back and forth about a number of Uber vs. Taxi matters. At one point, a Councilman asked T. Kalanick about transporting people confined to wheelchairs. What was the first thing out of T. Kalanick's mouth?

".....you need to look to the taxicab industry for that.............."

Some time later, after it launched Uber Taxi, Uber did sign up some accessible taxicabs. At the time, there were only twenty of those in the City. I sent him three drivers, two of whom he signed up. I do not know if any of those in the other company ever signed up. The owner of that other company did threaten to kick out any of his drivers who were working with Uber Taxi, Hail-O or My Taxi (the last two have since left North America). He does work with Curb. All of the accessibles, at the time, were rental cabs. That has since changed; there are now privately owned accessibles. There are more than twenty, as well. The city has issued quotas to the cab companies for accessibles. The number required goes up every year until the level is at twenty per-cent of the total cabs out there. Further, the only way that anyone can have a new H-plate is to put on either an accessible or pure electric.


----------



## Khurzog (Apr 26, 2016)

I'm not reading any of the previous replys, so my apologies of this repeats something already said. Here is how you handle this situation. First, DO NOT CANCEL THE RIDE (yet.) You need to have a very polite conversation with the pax. Most of the times, they are canceled on, it's in a very rude fashion, so engaging in a polite conversation about the incompatiblity might solve the problem outright. But here is how you avoid legal problems. Once you do cancel, go offline and help (or offer to) them ping a replacement driver, then wait (or offer to) until they arrive. By taking initiative in getting them a suitable driver you are fulfilling ADA expectations. Hope this helps.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Khurzog said:


> I'm not reading any of the previous replys, so my apologies of this repeats something already said.


Since you're new here, here's a tip: Read the thread. This has been the answer others have posted (and verified), and you would have saved your own time by doing the same reading everyone else has... as well as our time loading up the thread to read the new reply.


----------



## Khurzog (Apr 26, 2016)

well, thank you HoldenDriver for being an expert on MY TIME LINE, i will make sure all events in my life are ran through YOU in the future because now that i have you dictating my scheduling, it will sure be a load off my shoulders. Just so you know, i was sitting down to dinner at applebees and had maybe 5 minutes before my food came, so 8 pages seemed a little daunting to say the least. PLEASE FORGIVE ME for throwing in a few words of advice on A FREAKIN ADVICE FORUM. I hope my redundancy isn't a blight on this thread that otherwise is filled with hundreds of posts that, aside from mine, are all FRESH, RELEVANT, AND INSIGHTFUL. i have just made a mess of things now haven't i? i guess i will go back to my local groups where i am not branded a "new member" and only provide my input where it welcomed and appreciated. THANK YOU!


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

Uber doesn't care about you or your allergies. They care most about bad press and making money off of your back and your car.

If you see a dog heading to your car. "Hit cancel, don't charge rider" and drive away.


----------



## Khurzog (Apr 26, 2016)

see, at least i'm not that guy^


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

All you do is apologize, explain why you must cancel, show your papers, be sincere, perform a "do not charge customer" option within the app. Let them reorder another Uber and stay with them until the new Uber arrives. That's it, that's what you do.


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

OP, Uber will take the position that *you* are not fit to be one of their drivers due to your allergies. They will deactivate you if they find out you reject a _Service Animal_ in any way shape or form....


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

FAC said:


> Only if we can put unruly drunks in the trunk too!


BEST IDEA I'VE HEARD EVER, EVER ON THIS BOARD! : )


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

I have taken like 5 dogs in my 1.5 years of part-time ubering. One called me in advance. One was an emotional support dog - I know cuz I was taking them to LAX and asked if she forgot her doggy container, he was like 50lb bull-dog too. And he farted the entire drive there.....lol. Another was this poor girl stuck on the side of a dark road in front a closed dealership, not in the best area late at night - long story. She had been cancelled on by 3 drivers, two as they drove up and pulled off.

I've sworn off driving Uber Drunks, and to be honest, these smelly but always nice pups are far easier to deal with. So, if you don't have a problem with driving animals, TOFTT and pick-em up. I'll let OP handle the Uber Drunks and I'll do the sober canines! : )


----------



## Chicago88 (Feb 7, 2016)

FAC said:


> I'm intrigued to see how this plays out. If indeed there are lawsuits curious if it would set a national or state precedent.
> 
> This is just another issue that could possibly change our status as employees.


What law suit could come off this? The law is abundantly clear as Beur had clearly shown, even your links support exactly what he's stated many times in this thread - ONLY legally defined service animals require acceptance and that list is very specific.


----------



## RHutch187 (Mar 8, 2016)

FAC said:


> Unfortunately the Pax ADA rights trumps yours. Under the ADA laws fear of dogs or allergies are not sufficient not to allow a disabled person with their dog. Sorry but having allergies don't provide you with any ADA protection. I've seen several posts on this issue and I believe Uber's policy on allergies is that you can cancel the ride but you must wait until another uber driver comes and accepts the pax and her dog. Then hopefully uber will remove the cancellation from your record but I wouldn't hold your breath. Uber and you as an independent contractor can get into a lot of trouble if you violate the ADA laws. It's unfortunate but it's the law.
> 
> I personally have a service dog so I'm pretty familiar with the ADA laws. I try my best to be as respectful for others as I can be. When I'm a pax I always call the driver immediately to give them the option to opt out if they have dog issues of any kind. Not just allergies. If they don't want a dog in their car I respect that. I will cancel and so it won't hurt the driver.
> 
> ...


Since you drive the dog in the car what happens if the rider has enough people to completely fill up the car?


----------



## MeekloBraca (Apr 17, 2015)

I drove a woman and her seeing eye dog one time, had to spend 10 bucks to go clean up after it, and then decided never again. I rejected a woman at our airport because she had a dog that wasnt kenneled. Too f-ing bad.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

MeekloBraca said:


> I drove a woman and her seeing eye dog one time, had to spend 10 bucks to go clean up after it, and then decided never again. I rejected a woman at our airport because she had a dog that wasnt kenneled. Too f-ing bad.


Unbelievable. Featured and 9 pages later. I hope you don't need assistance or know someone who does, even a vet and no I don't mean the dog kind, those are V-E-T for dogs that can't spell. 

Like anything else doing this work, there isn't a problem, until there is. A pet is one thing, someone who has one, an ADA dog, someone who needs one is different.

You will definitely get dinged for it, most likely tossed and karma is, well you know who she is.  The lawsuits are against Travass, that doesn't mean their policy is they don't care, my understanding as I've said several times is they do, and they don't tell you, like a lot of other things. You can easily be replaced with 3 new drivers.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Khurzog said:


> well, thank you HoldenDriver for being an expert on MY TIME LINE, i will make sure all events in my life are ran through YOU in the future because now that i have you dictating my scheduling, it will sure be a load off my shoulders. Just so you know, i was sitting down to dinner at applebees and had maybe 5 minutes before my food came, so 8 pages seemed a little daunting to say the least. PLEASE FORGIVE ME for throwing in a few words of advice on A FREAKIN ADVICE FORUM. I hope my redundancy isn't a blight on this thread that otherwise is filled with hundreds of posts that, aside from mine, are all FRESH, RELEVANT, AND INSIGHTFUL. i have just made a mess of things now haven't i? i guess i will go back to my local groups where i am not branded a "new member" and only provide my input where it welcomed and appreciated. THANK YOU!


Khurzog its not that your advice is not helpful. And please keep posting. I've learned a lot through the this site. I know reading all the previous posts are daunting and appreciate your willingness to add some advice. But in this thread after 9 pages we are beating a dead horse at this point.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Khurzog its not that your advice is not helpful. And please keep posting. I've learned a lot through the this site. I know reading all the previous posts are daunting and appreciate your willingness to add some advice. But in this thread after 9 pages we are beating a dead horse at this point.


Are we beating a dead mini horse or a full sized horse? If it's a mini horse I'm sure there's an ADA law against that!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Realityshark said:


> Uber doesn't care about you or your allergies. They care most about bad press and making money off of your back and your car.
> 
> If you see a dog heading to your car. "Hit cancel, don't charge rider" and drive away.


It's not uber that doesn't care about allergies. It's the ADA law that say allergies are valid reason not to provide service.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Beur said:


> Are we beating a dead mini horse or a full sized horse? If it's a mini horse I'm sure there's an ADA law against that!


Just to keep the activists away, I'm sure you didn't mean literally.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> Are we beating a dead mini horse or a full sized horse? If it's a mini horse I'm sure there's an ADA law against that!


Is it possible to end this post now? I think I broke the ADA law by beating the mini horse to death and putting the service dog in the trunk along with the drunks and cancelling pax during surge and the pax that don't tip! My trunk is too full for any more conversation on this.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

UberLaLa said:


> OP, Uber will take the position that *you* are not fit to be one of their drivers due to your allergies. They will deactivate you if they find out you reject a _Service Animal_ in any way shape or form....


Frankly that could get Uber sued. Uber does understand some drivers can't take service animals, and has a fix.

I realize this post may be sarcastic in nature, but some might take the above quote as serious. You do need to get a blood test that shows you are allergic to animals - for your protection, but that's easy to do and covered by most insurance.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Is it possible to end this post now? I think I broke the ADA law by beating the mini horse to death and putting the service dog in the trunk along with the drunks and cancelling pax during surge and the pax that don't tip! My trunk is too full for any more conversation on this.


You forgot the cats!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> You forgot the cats!


Nah the cats can wait on the side of the rode. No cats in my car and the trunk is full (the dead mini horse took up too much room-still looking for a place to hide all the bodies and dead horse)
Damn this post has now hurt my head to the point I can't spell. I mean road.


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

FAC said:


> It's not uber that doesn't car


You're right. Luber loves their drivers.


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

FAC said:


> cats can wait on the side of the rode


Lost your cat? Look under my tires.


----------



## Gees2016 (Apr 25, 2016)

I can understand your allergies, its your car so its your decision. Service dogs are well behaved, and like the person said above a call to the driver would be nice ahead of time. I had a customer get in my car and she had a lil dog in a carrier but he would not stop barking the whole 25 minute ride. I will take a service dog but no personal pets if the customer does not feel the need to ask my permission about his/her pet getting into my vehicle. I mean some animals might have fleas, respect my vehicle or dont ride.


----------



## txtim1982 (Jan 5, 2016)

<<< Hey look! The Lyuberkracken! 

But seriously, for those of you saying that Comfort or Emotional support dogs are not service animals, take a step back. I don't know and don't care what the ADA says about these being recognized Service Animals.... they are animals providing an incredible service to many people. Are there some that may take advantage of the system, sure, as there are everywhere else. However, many of my battle buddies who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have these Animals and they do extraordinary work.

A good friend of mine was the only person in his Stryker that survived an IED blast. He was diagnosed, and the VA provided him a Service Animal. A beautiful Golden Retriever. Still, 6 years after he and I left Afghanistan on the same flight, he will be triggered by something and go into a very dark place. His wife told stories of how he would go into a closet or out to his car and just sit there for hours, sometimes crying, sometimes angry, sometimes completely detached. When the VA provided him with the Service Animal, it gave him a reason to get up and go for a walk or run (take the dog for exercise), lead and train (the job of an NCO) again. Now, when the emotional distress comes to him, the dog knows, and will sit with him, giving him something to love, something to hold, and brings him out of the funk much faster. His wife says they are happening with much less frequency, and he has started to be what we all consider normal again. These Emotional Support animals do the work that hours of therapy may never come close to doing. While he my not be trained to open a door, get the mail, sniff a bomb, find a cadaver or get a beer from the fridge, this Animal is as much of a Service Dog as a dog leading a blind person down the street.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

It seems like this thread rears its ugly head every few months. The law sucks, get over it.

You can do whatever you want, including refusing service to a person with a service animal BUT you will face the consequences if it's reported and I would think that's a high probability event. Uber will deactivate you if a legitimate complaint is lodged.

Bottom line, if you have an allergy, you can do this until you get a fare with a service animal who complains that you refused service. You have very limited questions you can ask and waiting with them while they call another Uber is treating them differently which is a violation of the law. You do however have the right to ask for a cleanup fee if they make a mess, fur or otherwise.

One way around this if you are truly allergic might be to inform the passenger that they of course have the right to bring the service dog into the car BUT if they do so, since you are very allergic to pet dander, you will have to get the car Hepa cleaned which might result in a cleaning fee of several hundred dollars. That would probably deter them and from my reading would be perfectly legal.

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


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

txtim1982 said:


> <<< Hey look! The Lyuberkracken!
> 
> But seriously, for those of you saying that Comfort or Emotional support dogs are not service animals, take a step back. I don't know and don't care what the ADA says about these being recognized Service Animals.... they are animals providing an incredible service to many people. Are there some that may take advantage of the system, sure, as there are everywhere else. However, many of my battle buddies who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have these Animals and they do extraordinary work.
> 
> A good friend of mine was the only person in his Stryker that survived an IED blast. He was diagnosed, and the VA provided him a Service Animal. A beautiful Golden Retriever. Still, 6 years after he and I left Afghanistan on the same flight, he will be triggered by something and go into a very dark place. His wife told stories of how he would go into a closet or out to his car and just sit there for hours, sometimes crying, sometimes angry, sometimes completely detached. When the VA provided him with the Service Animal, it gave him a reason to get up and go for a walk or run (take the dog for exercise), lead and train (the job of an NCO) again. Now, when the emotional distress comes to him, the dog knows, and will sit with him, giving him something to love, something to hold, and brings him out of the funk much faster. His wife says they are happening with much less frequency, and he has started to be what we all consider normal again. These Emotional Support animals do the work that hours of therapy may never come close to doing. While he my not be trained to open a door, get the mail, sniff a bomb, find a cadaver or get a beer from the fridge, this Animal is as much of a Service Dog as a dog leading a blind person down the street.


He and his service animal are welcome in my Uber any time, too.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

txtim1982 said:


> But seriously, for those of you saying that Comfort or Emotional support dogs are not service animals, take a step back. I don't know and don't care what the ADA says about these being recognized Service Animals.... they are animals providing an incredible service to many people.


 txtim1982 thank you for sharing your story. Your feedback may help change the minds of those who don't understand what an important role these dogs take in the lives of many. Especially for our honored vets! Great post!


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

FAC said:


> thank you for sharing your story.


When I saw how long it was, I didn't read it. Not being mean, just honest. Call me selfish, but I don't want to clean up dog hair in my car or have my seats tore up with their little doggie paw nails.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Realityshark said:


> When I saw how long it was, I didn't read it. Not being mean, just honest. Call me selfish, but I don't want to clean up dog hair in my car or have my seats tore up with their little doggie paw nails.


Not all dogs shed. Not all dogs tear up seats. Perhaps if you did read txtim1982 message perhaps you would have a little compassion. Especially for the soldiers who served this country and put their lives on the line to protect us. 

I will call you selfish especially compared to the soldiers who serve on our behalf and now need the assistance of emotional support dog. I will call you selfish for making such a post without reading txtim1982 post before respond with such a selfish uncaring self centered post.


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

FAC said:


> I will call you selfish especially compared to the soldiers


Wow...all that and I'm a veteran. Sorry I didn't lose a leg or end up with ptsd for you, oh goddess and protector of this holy thread.

Thanks for all you do to keep this thread free of sarcastic losers like me. Your unselfish hours spent behind your keyboard is a great service to society.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

RHutch187 said:


> Since you drive the dog in the car what happens if the rider has enough people to completely fill up the car?


Sorry didn't see your question. I don't often get a full car. Mattie is a small dog. Even small for a Westie. So most the time Mattie sleeps on my left leg when I drive, she might get aroused when door opens but often sleeps through it. She's been doing this her whole life even when I have her car seat in the car. She's a small dog. When she's not sleeping she is greeting the pax then curls up and goes back to sleep. Unless the pax want to hold her. Can't tell you how many times pax argued about who gets to hold Mattie. It's amusing. Mattie eats up the attention and plays neglected quite well. Only once on Lyft a comment was made about Mattie but it wasn't a complaint. On Uber I have more 5* remarks about her than me. Mattie is my second service dog. My first was Roxie. Ever since I got Roxie I lost my identity. No longer referred to by my name just as Roxie and Mattie's mom.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Realityshark said:


> Wow...all that and I'm a veteran. Sorry I didn't lose a leg or end up with ptsd for you, oh goddess and protector of this holy thread.
> 
> Thanks for all you do to keep this thread free of sarcastic losers like me. Your unselfish hours spent behind your keyboard is a great service to society.


I'm not being sarcastic here...I'm being genuine.
Realityshark, Thank you for your service. I have the upmost respect for our servicemen and women. I'm glad you didn't get injured during your time serving this country or get PTSD. But I'm sure you know better than me that many people did. You don't need to be so prejudicial against the ones who have the need for service or emotional support animals.

AND you are the one admitted to being selfish. I just agreed with you!


----------



## Archie8616 (Oct 13, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.
> 
> Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.
> 
> ...


I like your posting....but just like any such legal questions, don't depend on what you search on google, or search on forums. When I was in the Military, there was a running joke about guys who gave legal advice...we called them "Barrack lawyers". I guess you could call folks who tend to give "Legal advice" Forum Lawyers, with no legal education whatsoever other then saying they have experience in this or that. Get yourself a lawyer, get your facts and a lawyer will be able to tell you your options. Other than that, wish you the best in your search for options that would help you with your allergies.


----------



## NachonCheeze (Sep 8, 2015)

FAC said:


> It still would be a legal battle for the driver. A precedent must be set. Further the Uber rules specifically say all drivers must pick up pax with service dogs.
> 
> I would recommend if a driver is seriously allergic to the service dog, just tell the pax. Cancel the ride and wait to make sure they get picked up by another driver. Who wants to deal with the litigation? Moreover, the courts more often side with ADA.


Could not care less about what the fUber rules say


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

NachonCheeze said:


> Could not care less about what the fUber rules say


It's not the Uber rules you need to be concerned about. It's the ADA laws.


----------



## NachonCheeze (Sep 8, 2015)

FAC said:


> It's not the Uber rules you need to be concerned about. It's the ADA laws.


I was commenting to your statement: Further the Uber rules specifically say all drivers must pick up pax with service dogs.


----------



## Chicago88 (Feb 7, 2016)

I was uber-ing up north in Michigan when a deer hunter ping'ed me (with the app)...I arrived to see a dead deer and him... I said no way can that deer come with, he said it was a service animal - he said it tasted good (lucky it wasn't a Korean hunter, who knows what they hunt???) - I couldn't refuse because of Uber... Now there's deer blood smeared all over my wind shield, but no one seems to care because I drive Uber X and I'm super cheap... Pax love that!


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

FAC said:


> I did not spread any misinformation. All my information came directly from the ADA website and I included the link to the URL for all my references.


Actually you did. You first said State Law can only be less restrictive than Federal Law. But when Beur called you out on this misinformation you essentially repeated and validated what he said and then added that you were right. Not true. You were wrong on that. State Law can only be more restrictive. Plus what started Beur on his responses was you saying in no circumstances can a drivers disability trump a passengers. Then he put evidence out which would be a good argument. His article about separation was just as good if not better than your link from the ADA. So though it does not specifically address the exact issue I would bet since seperating would be impossible that a driver allergic would not have to do the ride. But it is not clear and Beur said he will call and get clarity.

So my findings is you were definitely wrong about State vs Federal Law and still have not acknowledged that.

You are likely wrong (still awaiting clarification) on driver with allergy being forced to accommodate since seperating impossible.

But personally I'm a dog lover so as long as any dog is not dragging mud and not violent I'm allowing. I got a towel for them and got leather seats.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

MattyMikey said:


> Actually you did. You first said State Law can only be less restrictive than Federal Law. But when Beur called you out on this misinformation you essentially repeated and validated what he said and then added that you were right. Not true. You were wrong on that. State Law can only be more restrictive. Plus what started Beur on his responses was you saying in no circumstances can a drivers disability trump a passengers. Then he put evidence out which would be a good argument. His article about separation was just as good if not better than your link from the ADA. So though it does not specifically address the exact issue I would bet since seperating would be impossible that a driver allergic would not have to do the ride. But it is not clear and Beur said he will call and get clarity.
> 
> So my findings is you were definitely wrong about State vs Federal Law and still have not acknowledged that.
> 
> ...


*Seriously?! We are back to this again?* 

MattyMikey who the f#ck do you think you are? Does your self righteous indignation of judging me and going out of your fricking way to point out I'm wrong make you feel better?! Especially on a topic that we pretty much already beat the service mini-horse to death on this issue!!

Nowhere did you site any source backing up your claims. At least I did. And in fact Beur sited my my source as well in his response #100 when he generously went out of his way and took his valuable time to call the ADA to find out the law.

Are you an attorney? Got a law license I can verify before you stand judgement of me?!



MattyMikey said:


> So my findings is you were definitely wrong about State vs Federal Law and still have not acknowledged that.
> 
> You are likely wrong (still awaiting clarification) on driver with allergy being forced to accommodate since seperating impossible.


I may have misspoke earlier but corrected myself in post #19 of this thread if you had bothered to read all the posts in this thread.



FAC said:


> When the federal government passes laws, it is basically setting a minimum standard that all states must respect. Individual states are then free to adopt stronger protections or to fill in gaps in protection left by the federal framework. The only thing states cannot do is say that people in that state get less protections/rights than set out in the federal law.
> ...
> When it comes to disability law, the law that gives the greater protection to the disabled person always wins out.


Anyway didn't you read the entire thread? Beur took the initiative to call the ADA and get the info straight from them to share on this board. In post #100 Unfortunately what he learned and shared is there is a gray area that won't be resolved until a lawsuit is filed.

I think there's still a little room left in my trunk to add MattyMikey along with the dead mini-service horse, the service dog, the drunk pax, and the pax that cancels during a surge. But, Fireguy50, the damn cat still ain't going in my trunk!


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> *Seriously?! We are back to this again?*
> 
> MattyMikey who the f#ck do you think you are? Does your self righteous indignation of judging me and going out of your fricking way to point out I'm wrong make you feel better?! Especially on a topic that we pretty much already beat the service mini-horse to death on this issue!!
> 
> ...


That poor damn cat being left on the side of the road in the cold.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> That poor damn cat being left on the side of the road in the cold.


Ain't gonna feed it either!


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Ain't gonna feed it either!


I'll feed it, feed it to my dog. Man my Jack Russell hates cats.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Ten pages, unbelievable. If you're allergic, you're allergic and you should want to help get the disabled person a driver. Otherwise this job isn't for you.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> Ten pages, unbelievable. If you're allergic, you're allergic and you should want to help get the disabled person a driver. Otherwise this job isn't for you.


I think these long threads once featured attract the "fame seekers." Some pretty F'd up responses since being featured.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> Ain't gonna feed it either!


Love the 2 bastard's
But they aren't meant to be indoor animals, $h!T heads need go outside and dusk, they get the night craziness. Plus the one is a great barn cat, catches $h!T bigger than him. Terrorize the neighborhood dogs. Leave his a$$ on the curb, he belongs there!


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

You guys are mean.  I like cats as much as dogs.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> You guys are mean.  I like cats as much as dogs.


When I was a kid I had a neighborhood cat claw through the screen and try to smother me while I was sleeping. I might have an irrational dislike of them now.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

FAC said:


> *Seriously?! We are back to this again?*
> 
> MattyMikey who the f#ck do you think you are? Does your self righteous indignation of judging me and going out of your fricking way to point out I'm wrong make you feel better?! Especially on a topic that we pretty much already beat the service mini-horse to death on this issue!!
> 
> ...


So when I replied you had not. My reply to the message was earlier before "your correction". So no I did not (nor would I ever) read the entire forum first and then go back to replying to messages.

My fact was clearly that fact. It was backed up by me calling you out on the information that you said that was proved incorrect. And if it wasn't then you would not have had to correct post #19.

And the other aspect I admitted it was to interpretation. And at the time of the post it was before Beur called. After he called it makes me still believe that the opinion you sited is incorrect though I will admit to it (again) not being more clearly defined.

But I did read all the entire messages after I replied and don't remember seeing you admit the inaccurate information as far as State vs Federal Law. If you did and I missed it I do apologize for that.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> You guys are mean.  I like cats as much as dogs.


Well nobody likes you 5Star so who cares j/k  Cats suck though.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

MattyMikey said:


> Well nobody likes you 5Star so who cares j/k  Cats suck though.


Hey, I resemble that remark.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Beur said:


> I'll feed it, feed it to my dog. Man my Jack Russell hates cats.


I'll put $100 on my cat!




Sorry the music is unbearable!


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> I'll put $100 on my cat!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've seen that. My guy is a true Jack Russell through and through. Brings in the fruit rats all the time. Only once has he brought me a cat.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

I get mice, moles, birds, chipmunks, squirrels, Raven. I know he's gotten in fights with racoon's, possums, and skunks.

Here's a video of Hobbes preying on moles when it rained and they came up. (Yes I left him out all night in the rain, grows chest hair)


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> I'll put $100 on my cat!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First, I blame the owners of the dog. There are not bad dogs, just bad owners!

My Westie wants more than anything to have a cat as a friend but they find the happy playful dog annoying. Mattie got her but kicked twice by a cat. But it was her own damn fault she kept pestering the cat.

I don't really hate cats. Just deathly allergic to them. Actually had a Ferrell cat live in my woodshed for years. Named him Sammy. He was the stud of the neighborhood. All the girls were after him. When they mated it sounded like someone was getting murdered in my back yard.

Birds on the other hand scare the bejuses out of me. I could be driving down the street and if a bird flew by id swerve and duck. I get teased a lot about my fear of birds. So no service birds in my car either. I'll leave the bird out on the side of the road for the cat to eat. See I got some humanity towards cats


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> I get mice, moles, birds, chipmunks, squirrels, Raven. I know he's gotten in fights with racoon's, possums, and skunks.
> 
> Here's a video of Hobbes preying on moles when it rained and they came up. (Yes I left him out all night in the rain, grows chest hair)


Your cat is just leaving you presents. Hunting food for his human to eat because obviously you can't hunt and gather food on your own.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

Beur said:


> On the phone with ADA
> ...She said this is an interesting question because Uber does not own the car the driver does, it's their private car and as a private citizen you are not bound by ADA Title3...
> 
> Two recommended readings she suggested are:
> ...


As any intelligent person capable of reading the law figured out a long time ago. Uber's been on the wrong side of this since the beginning, for political reasons. If it were legally binding, then it would have been in the Partner Agreement, which it never has been. Thank you Beur for finally putting this urban myth to bed.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Wil_Iam_Fuber'd said:


> As any intelligent person capable of reading the law figured out a long time ago. Uber's been on the wrong side of this since the beginning, for political reasons. If it were legally binding, then it would have been in the Partner Agreement, which it never has been. Thank you Beur for finally putting this urban myth to bed.


That's the problem here, it isn't a myth. It isn't in writing though.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> That's the problem here, it isn't a myth. It isn't in writing though.


Go read the actual law guy, It's in writing.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Wil_Iam_Fuber'd said:


> Go read the actual law guy, It's in writing.


What is in writing? The policy is not in writing but it exists.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Uber technology cellular phone application company with contracted drivers are NOT specifically written into the law.
It's going to require a lawsuit to determine the definition of the law!

WELCOME TO THE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

MattyMikey what is your deal?! Your reply makes no sense. The fact I'm even responding to you makes no sense to me other than you really pissed me off.

You sit there high and mighty and judge me when admittedly you haven't even read the entire thread. Don't forget when you point your finger at someone four other fingers are pointing right back at you.

If anyone has mad misrepresentations on this site it is you!



MattyMikey said:


> So when I replied you had not. My reply to the message was earlier before "your correction". So no I did not (nor would I ever) read the entire forum first and then go back to replying to messages.


How could your reply to the message possibly be prior to my correction? You didn't even show up to this converstation until after 194 posts were made. So help me out here, how in the world was your reply earlier than my correction when there existed 176 posts on this thread before you decided to judge me and point out how wrong I am? Then you admit you didn't read the entire thread but somehow feel entitled to write a post singling me out to tell me how wrong I am. Does that make you feel a warm and fuzzy inside? Does going out of your way to judge others without all the facts help feed some ubsurb seperiority complex of yours? Or are you just a mean self rightous chauvinistic pig?

Fireguy50 changed my mind. There is room in my trunk for the damn cat! I'd rather have the dead mini-horse, dog, drunk paxs, paxs that cancel on surge and the damn cat in my trunk than MattyMikey! I'll leave him on the curb for your two cats to torture.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

So, digesting all this - we have two different paths this conversation is taking here: Uber Policy & The Law.

*The Law:* Based on people's calls to the government, this is very much unsettled ground - both at the local and federal level. Title 3 does not currently apply to us drivers, no determination has been made enforcing Title 3 on us. As of now, there is no law mandating independent contractors of Uber to accept a service animal... particularly if a driver has a documented allergy. Uber is navigating uncharted territory - until a case results in a determination on Title 3.

*Uber Policy:* Uber can, however, add additional policies that stipulate more than the law. The Partner Agreement does allow them to give directives and instructions based on support documents. There is, or at least, in some markets, is a video providing the requested protocol. That is, again, that the Uber driver with an allergy cancel - and stand with the pax while another Uber driver is dispatched. The first Uber driver greets the second, explains the situation, and then goes back online.

I don't think Uber policy and the law are in conflict. If ADA Title 3 does apply to Uber drivers, Uber's Policy is likely Title 3 compliant. And if Title 3 is not required, then Uber drivers still can comply with the policy - with minimal impact to their bottom line.

I also don't think Uber's Policy on this is invalid. Uber should, however, document it in a written support/help article.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> So, digesting all this - we have two different paths this conversation is taking here: Uber Policy & The Law.
> 
> *The Law:* Based on people's calls to the ADA, this is very much unsettled ground - both at the local and federal level. Title 3 does not currently apply to us drivers, no determination has been made enforcing Title 3 on us. As of now, there is no law mandating independent contractors of Uber to accept a service animal... particularly if a driver has a documented allergy. Uber is navigating uncharted territory - until a case results in a determination on Title 3.
> 
> ...


HoldenDriver, great recap of 200+ posts on this issue. Please oh please can this topic be put to rest now?


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> [USER=35938]Fireguy50 changed my mind. There is room in my trunk for the damn cat! I'd rather have the dead mini-horse, dog, drunk paxs, paxs that cancel on surge and the damn cat in my trunk
> MattyMikey! I'll leave him on the curb for your two cats to torture.[/USER]



Please no, I don't want the damn cat, leave him home alone to hunt
[QUOTE="HoldenDriver, post: 1029334, member: 42408"]So, digesting all this - we have two different paths this conversation is taking here: Uber Policy & The Law.

[B]The Law:[/B] Based on people's calls to the government, this is very much unsettled ground - both at the local and federal level. Title 3 does not currently apply to us drivers, no determination has been made enforcing Title 3 on us. As of now, there is no law mandating independent contractors of Uber to accept a service animal... particularly if a driver has a documented allergy. Uber is navigating uncharted territory - until a case results in a determination on Title 3.[/QUOTE]
Correct, it will require a Supreme Court ruling to define the current law for us
[QUOTE="HoldenDriver, post: 1029334, member: 42408"]So, digesting all this - we have two different paths this conversation is taking here: Uber Policy & The Law.

[B]Uber Policy:[/B] Uber can, however, add additional policies that stipulate more than the law. The Partner Agreement does allow them to give directives and instructions based on support documents. There is, or at least, in some markets, is a video providing the requested protocol. That is, again, that the Uber driver with an allergy cancel - and stand with the pax while another Uber driver is dispatched. The first Uber driver greets the second, explains the situation, and then goes back online.

I don't think Uber policy and the law are in conflict. If ADA Title 3 does apply to Uber drivers, Uber's Policy is likely Title 3 compliant. And if Title 3 is not required, then Uber drivers still can comply with the policy - with minimal impact to their bottom line.

I also don't think Uber's Policy on this is invalid. Uber should, however, document it in a written support/help article.[/QUOTE]
More policy ruins their "we're only a technonolgy company with independent contractor drivers" defense


----------



## likesbeeralot (Oct 22, 2015)

I am allergic to ALL animals with hair, just not dander. Therefore cats, dogs, hamsters, mice, rats, horses ect.. so does that comply with the ADA?


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

likesbeeralot said:


> I am allergic to ALL animals with hair, just not dander. Therefore cats, dogs, hamsters, mice, rats, horses ect.. so does that comply with the ADA?


You forgot the service mini-horse


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

likesbeeralot said:


> I am allergic to ALL animals with hair, just not dander. Therefore cats, dogs, hamsters, mice, rats, horses ect.. so does that comply with the ADA?


Go ahead and get a lawyer willing to attempt fame sueing Uber.
Let us know how it goes?


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> Please no, I don't want the damn cat, leave him home alone to hunt
> 
> Correct, it will require a Supreme Court ruling to define the current law for us
> 
> More policy ruins their "we're only a technonolgy company with independent contractor drivers" defense


Frankly these are exogenous to the issue. Even if Uber drivers are employees, the same policy would be in effect. The divide between independent contractors and employees, would only (possibly) trigger Title 3 - in which case, the same Uber policy on this situation would be effective. Drivers have to take service animals - unless they have a documented allergy - then they wait with pax while a second driver is requested.

Also this wouldn't require SCOTUS, just an EEOC determination. That might be litigated, but I doubt it.


----------



## likesbeeralot (Oct 22, 2015)

Even though its was a simple yes or on question, i should have known not to post such a question when its to the point of trolling and smartass remarks


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> Go ahead and get a lawyer willing to attempt fame sueing Uber.
> Let us know how it goes?


Fireguy50 Where do you find your clips? I'm laughing so hard tears are rolling down my face


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

likesbeeralot said:


> Even though its was a simple yes or on question, i should have known not to post such a question when its to the point of trolling and smartass remarks


likesbeeralot I'm sorry if I offended you. Myself; Fireguy50; Beur ; 5 Star Guy; HoldenDriver; and a few others have been posting since the start of this thread. We are not trolling but after nearly 230 posts on this subject, the sarcasm just can't help itself. Especially when a new post shows up that already was addressed. I'm sorry for my sarcastic response. There was an earlier joke about service mini-horses and I just couldn't help myself. But that's no excuse. Please accept my sincere apology.

You're right, a yes or no answer was all that was needed. But the reality is the reason why there are nearly 230 posts is because there is no cut and dry yes or no answer. Until a complaint is filed with the ADA and/or a lawsuit is filed its still a gray area.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Well, to my _original_ question - it's not a gray area, but it isn't a yes/no question either.

Follow the Uber policy. If you have a documented allergy, pull over if possible, stand with pax, and instruct them to request second driver. Then greet the second driver. If it's not safe to stop, ask the pax to request second driver, inform them of your allergy and the policy, and document the situation that prevented you from pulling over (airport terminal, etc).

Following the Uber policy ensures you won't stand alone in court, and you'll be protected.

If you don't have a documented allergy, you can cancel (due to service animal) - but you risk reprisal from Uber (at-will deactivation for cause), and possibly local/state governments.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

FAC said:


> First, I blame the owners of the dog. There are not bad dogs, just bad owners!
> 
> My Westie wants more than anything to have a cat as a friend but they find the happy playful dog annoying. Mattie got her but kicked twice by a cat. But it was her own damn fault she kept pestering the cat.
> 
> ...


Everyone gets along here...


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Everyone gets along here...
> View attachment 37465


Fuzzyelvis didn't you see my earlier post? I finally changed my mind about the cat, the cats now allowed in my trunk with the dead service mini-horse, the dog, the drunk pax, and the pax that cancels during a surge. One big happy family in my trunk. I'll be busy tomorrow digging holes burying the bodies.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Frankly these are exogenous to the issue. Even if Uber drivers are employees, the same policy would be in effect. The divide between independent contractors and employees, would only (possibly) trigger Title 3 - in which case, the same Uber policy on this situation would be effective. Drivers have to take service animals - unless they have a documented allergy - then they wait with pax while a second driver is requested.
> 
> Also this wouldn't require SCOTUS, just an EEOC determination. That might be litigated, but I doubt it.


True, but with the net worth of Uber, competent legal team would push this as far as possible. I doubt the EEOC would satisfy the defending council.


FAC said:


> Fireguy50 Where do you find your clips? I'm laughing so hard tears are rolling down my face


Maybe I am old, you've never seen The Princess Bride!?
Great movie, thousands of usable quotes




I've pushed past the initial dizziness of meds, I could cure cancer with the right resources!


FAC said:


> likesbeeralot I'm sorry if I offended you. Myself; Fireguy50;But that's no excuse. Please accept my sincere apology.


Dude, I'm high on pain killers and you want to apologize? We're adults in FU¢€[email protected] America, anybody could have left the thread at their choosing. Everything's fine, if their feelings are hurt, they can log off the forum and Uber drive!


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Depends on the EEOC outcome, but I doubt it. If EEOC enforces Title 3, then Uber just makes their "video-only" policy the fully-enforced policy. If not, then Uber makes it a video-only policy that is only truly enforced in some states.

Only way Uber would fight EEOC is if they are found liable for independent contractor actions - which is (one of many reasons) why they are fighting to keep drivers as contractors. Uber might be more aggressive on this if a state rules Uber drivers as employees, however... that would open the door to Uber getting hauled before EEOC every time a driver messes up, and doesn't follow policy.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Exactly! Quoting previous post for a reason 


HoldenDriver said:


> Follow the Uber policy. If you have a documented allergy, pull over if possible, stand with pax, and instruct them to request second driver. Then greet the second driver. If it's not safe to stop, ask the pax to request second driver, inform them of your allergy and the policy, and document the situation that prevented you from pulling over (airport terminal, etc).


Location & times I typically drive are 10pm-3am and there are 2 Police vehicles covering every block. They don't give 2 $h!ts what we're doing,
"NO PARKING HERE, MOVE!"
And the way the campus layout is, safe/legal parking could be ¼ mile down. It gets tough when the students piss off all the law enforcement agencies in the area!
Most extreme example below of my work area:


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Also addressed. If you cannot stop the car, politely inform pax of your documented allergy, and that they need to request 2nd driver.

Follow what is safe to do, then follow the law, then Uber policy, and you'll be fine.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

FAC said:


> MattyMikey what is your deal?! Your reply makes no sense. The fact I'm even responding to you makes no sense to me other than you really pissed me off.
> 
> You sit there high and mighty and judge me when admittedly you haven't even read the entire thread. Don't forget when you point your finger at someone four other fingers are pointing right back at you.
> 
> ...


Do you know how forums work?? Apparently not. I never said I did not read the entire forum. I said when I clicked reply, I read the posts up to that point. You do realize new message replies show up at the end, right? So that is why my post may have showed up at 176 though when I responded it was still on page 2. What I did say was I did not read that early post and then say to myself... Let's read the other 150+ posts before I reply to your inaccuracies. You did give inaccurate information originally. You did not really admit you were wrong about the part of State Law vs Federal Law. So my reply was still factual. Granted later in towards the future replies you give up your argument and that would explain why I did not post anymore.

I'll be damned if you expect someone to read all posts first before going back to find ones you don't agree with to reply. I do start reading posts from the beginning of topics. And if they're interesting I will many times continue to read the rest of them.

Sorry if you're having trouble comprehending reading.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

MattyMikey said:


> Do you know how forums work?? Apparently not. I never said I did not read the entire forum. I said when I clicked reply, I read the posts up to that point. You do realize new message replies show up at the end, right? So that is why my post may have showed up at 176 though when I responded it was still on page 2. What I did say was I did not read that early post and then say to myself... Let's read the other 150+ posts before I reply to your inaccuracies. You did give inaccurate information originally. You did not really admit you were wrong about the part of State Law vs Federal Law. So my reply was still factual. Granted later in towards the future replies you give up your argument and that would explain why I did not post anymore.
> 
> I'll be damned if you expect someone to read all posts first before going back to find ones you don't agree with to reply. I do start reading posts from the beginning of topics. And if they're interesting I will many times continue to read the rest of them.
> 
> Sorry if you're having trouble comprehending reading.


Just because you can respond to a post early on without reading later posts doesn't mean you should. You look like an ignorant fool bringing up something that was already resolved. Especially on a topic that has has gone on and on and on.

Further, read your first post to me. It's full of judgement and indignation. So I ask again, does it make you feel good to so harshly judge someone especially when you don't know all the facts? It's not very nice and often times people get quite defensive.

Especially when the subject has been debated over and over again. Your original post just opened an old resolved matter in a not very nice way. If you read further you would guessed like the other guys did, I'm a bit emotionally attached to this issue. As at times I did fell attacked from all sides, especially since I do in fact need and use a service dog -- drive with her too (not sure if you got to that point either).

The debate got heated for a bit but then chilled out to the point we all were able to post joking sarcastic remarks at each other. So in my opinion thought the matter was closed. Then your post showed up and it felt as if you ripped opened a healed scab. As I admit in even a later post I do get outspoken when I fell my rights are trampled on, I get tired of it. At the same time I do my best not to allow my disability trample on other people's right.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> Exactly! Quoting previous post for a reason
> 
> Location & times I typically drive are 10pm-3am and there are 2 Police vehicles covering every block. They don't give 2 $h!ts what we're doing,
> "NO PARKING HERE, MOVE!"
> ...


I don't know where your from but that sucks the cops hassle you like they do. Your doing a service to keep drunk kids off the road. I'm sure your experience as a firefighter you've seen some gruesome accidents involving alcohol.

Denver the cops are really pretty cool about us parking and sometimes eeven double parking. My one and only bat rush (ain't doing that again) I was double parked. The cop came up to me tapped on my window only to remind me my brights were on.

Perhaps our services are more appreciated here by the cops because not only do we have drunks but stoners too. They are working on a roadside test to see if you've been token up but haven't perfected it. I'll tell you one thing, I'll take a stoned pax over a drunk one any day. I'll even let the stoners sit in the car and not the trunk. Although I don't partake in either drinking or smoking pot. Stoned pax are so much easier. And often they make me giggle.


----------



## devilmountain (Nov 24, 2015)

I am highly allergic to dogs and to a lessor extent cats. It causes breathing issues and it feels like I have glass in my eyes. My son has the same symptoms as me but he will actually break out in hives and what looks like massive bruises. Taking any animal is out of the question for me, even "hypo allergenic" dogs. I think that one annoys me the most because people do force their hypo allergenic dog on you, we are still very allergic. I actually had someone shove their "hypo allergenic" dog onto my son, within 30 seconds red marks and bruises started showing up on his face. He of course required medicine immediately.

I understand the need and use of service animals and the law. Service dogs are always well behaved (from my own personal experience) and fakes and ESA are not necessarily. Once again my experience has always been positive with service animals, always a mellow personality.

Now what bothers me are people needing to bring their pets everywhere, our cars, restaurants, grocery stores, the mall, wherever. I have to be vigilant and protect my well behaved child, and myself to a lessor extent from pets out in public. We have to ask hotels if they have special rooms for pets, because if we get a room a dog has stayed in my son will have a reaction. I have seen pets at Disneyland (with a service animal vest) full on barking at people the entire time. We have to walk around pets to ensure no contact, service animals have never approached us and tried to jump on us.

People have gotten so ridiculous with their pets, service animals are now receiving extra scrutiny. More has to be done to penalize people who try to pass their pet off as a real service animal. I think this is the real issue.... Myself I have never come across a pet or service animal while driving, I would just follow the aforementioned rules.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

2 hours of sleep with high levels of narcotics.........

Does the 1st or 2nd amendment apply to service animals?
Do they have the right to publicly assemble and protest our opinions?
Do we have the right to "stand our ground" and shoot the animal?


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver Very well said, I hope drivers read that. Independent contractors are tossed for all sorts of reasons, same as an employee. You don't have to break a law to be fired. That is my concern, court case or not it looks like they are tossing drivers for anything so they don't have a problem. There are a lot of things they don't say not just because Travass, is one but because of the employee issue. The more training and specifics they mandate drivers the more likely they are to be an employee. Now it will be interesting to see how soon this stuff changes so they give drivers more guidelines when the employee issue is resolved. My thing has been guidance for the TNC Gap insurance.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

FAC said:


> I don't know where your from but that sucks the cops hassle you like they do. Your doing a service to keep drunk kids off the road. I'm sure your experience as a firefighter you've seen some gruesome accidents involving alcohol.
> 
> Denver the cops are really pretty cool about us parking and sometimes eeven double parking. My one and only bat rush (ain't doing that again) I was double parked. The cop came up to me tapped on my window only to remind me my brights were on.
> 
> Perhaps our services are more appreciated here by the cops because not only do we have drunks but stoners too. They are working on a roadside test to see if you've been token up but haven't perfected it. I'll tell you one thing, I'll take a stoned pax over a drunk one any day. I'll even let the stoners sit in the car and not the trunk. Although I don't partake in either drinking or smoking pot. Stoned pax are so much easier. And often they make me giggle.


Michigan State University students have flipped and burned Police cars in the past.
Burned out a Taco Bell that never reopened, still boarded up to this day. Cops want the streets empty at 2:00am sharp, and will pull over any vehicle they find!
But the surge rates are great, and it's free entertainment if you're sober!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> Michigan State University students have flipped and burned Police cars in the past.
> Burned out a Taco Bell that never reopened, still boarded up to this day. Cops want the streets empty at 2:00am sharp, and will pull over any vehicle they find!
> But the surge rates are great, and it's free entertainment if you're sober!
> 
> View attachment 37523


Don't understand why the cops hassle you since you're helping clear the drunks away. I agree being sober around drunks can be amusing at times. Not sure if you saw one of my first posts about kicking out a pax and ending a ride early. A car full of drunk horny men just isn't worth the surge time and staying up so late. There is flirting but then again there is being vulgar expressing the explicit sexual acts they want t do to you for a tip. That's why I like the stoners better. They say they funniest things and I end up laughing along with them. Also they are too lazy to proposition me. By the time I get them home their about to pass out.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

devilmountain said:


> I am highly allergic to dogs and to a lessor extent cats. It causes breathing issues and it feels like I have glass in my eyes. My son has the same symptoms as me but he will actually break out in hives and what looks like massive bruises. Taking any animal is out of the question for me, even "hypo allergenic" dogs. I think that one annoys me the most because people do force their hypo allergenic dog on you, we are still very allergic. I actually had someone shove their "hypo allergenic" dog onto my son, within 30 seconds red marks and bruises started showing up on his face. He of course required medicine immediately.
> 
> I understand the need and use of service animals and the law. Service dogs are always well behaved (from my own personal experience) and fakes and ESA are not necessarily. Once again my experience has always been positive with service animals, always a mellow personality.
> 
> ...


Since you haven't come across a pet or service dog in your experience, why do you believe it's a real issue of people passing off their dogs as service animals. Ive never experienced of that or even heard of it being much of an issue.

I sympathize with yours and your sons allergies. Allergies are serious, I'm not minimizing your issues. For some it's a discomfort but in your sons case it's very serious. Many people have allergies to many different things. But you can still live a normal life with allergies. People with disabilities rely on their service dogs to try to live as normal of a life as they can. Be grateful you don't need such assistance.

People with psychiatric disorders have it even tougher than physical disorders. Psychiatric disorders are easily overlooked. Or people say just pull yourself out of it. Our minds are complex organs and when the mind doesn't work right nothing works right.

People who suffer from disabilitating psychiatric problems have the same right as others to use what means available to them to try to live normal lives. Thankfully there are service dogs and emotional support dogs trained to help people in these scenarios. Just because you can't physically see the disability doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Mental illnesses are just as serious as someone having cancer or someone being blind.

Also before you judge emotional support animals you should read an earlier post. They can be as important as a service dog to some, especially our vets coming home with PTSD helping them live normal lives.



txtim1982 said:


> <<< Hey look! The Lyuberkracken!
> 
> But seriously, for those of you saying that Comfort or Emotional support dogs are not service animals, take a step back. I don't know and don't care what the ADA says about these being recognized Service Animals.... they are animals providing an incredible service to many people. Are there some that may take advantage of the system, sure, as there are everywhere else. However, many of my battle buddies who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have these Animals and they do extraordinary work.
> 
> A good friend of mine was the only person in his Stryker that survived an IED blast. He was diagnosed, and the VA provided him a Service Animal. A beautiful Golden Retriever. Still, 6 years after he and I left Afghanistan on the same flight, he will be triggered by something and go into a very dark place. His wife told stories of how he would go into a closet or out to his car and just sit there for hours, sometimes crying, sometimes angry, sometimes completely detached. When the VA provided him with the Service Animal, it gave him a reason to get up and go for a walk or run (take the dog for exercise), lead and train (the job of an NCO) again. Now, when the emotional distress comes to him, the dog knows, and will sit with him, giving him something to love, something to hold, and brings him out of the funk much faster. His wife says they are happening with much less frequency, and he has started to be what we all consider normal again. These Emotional Support animals do the work that hours of therapy may never come close to doing. While he my not be trained to open a door, get the mail, sniff a bomb, find a cadaver or get a beer from the fridge, this Animal is as much of a Service Dog as a dog leading a blind person down the street.


It's easy to walk around someone with a service dog. It's not so easy having a disability requiring a service dog or emotional support animal. I have compassion and understand your allergies and what a hassle they can be; hopefully you can have a little compassion and understanding for those requiring th assistance of service dogs and emotional support animals.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Oh no here we go. It really is unbelievable that this is an issue.  Don't drive, wait for another driver or take a pill for your allergies. I have allergies too, not for animals.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Beur said:


> I think these long threads once featured attract the "fame seekers." Some pretty F'd up responses since being featured.


Be nice  i haven't experienced my 15 min of fame yet in my life. Thought maybe I'd get a shot on this forum. What if I were to die today and not experience my 15 min of fame? I bet you'd feel bad ​


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> Oh no here we go. It really is unbelievable that this is an issue.  Don't drive, wait for another driver or take a pill for your allergies. I have allergies too, not for animals.


I'm allergic to people who hate dogs. 

I'm also allergic to pax that don't tip. 

Very allergic to ignorant prejudical people; especially the extreme fundamental religious types. 

Just formed an allergy to drunk pax men who want to tip me by performing vulgar sexual acts to me. 

Sometimes I'm allergic to my mom. Love her dearly but she sure can be a handful at times

I'm very very very allergic to mean judgemental people. ​


----------



## devilmountain (Nov 24, 2015)

FAC said:


> Since you haven't come across a pet or service dog in your experience, why do you believe it's a real issue of people passing off their dogs as service animals. Ive never experienced of that or even heard of it being much of an issue.
> 
> I sympathize with yours and your sons allergies. Allergies are serious, I'm not minimizing your issues. For some it's a discomfort but in your sons case it's very serious. Many people have allergies to many different things. But you can still live a normal life with allergies. People with disabilities rely on their service dogs to try to live as normal of a life as they can. Be grateful you don't need such assistance.


So not being able to breath for both of us is a very serious issue, not a comfort issue. We frequent many public places where there are fake service animals, they are easy to spot. Comfort animals maybe, but they are not entitled to the same privileges as a service animal.

ESA are not covered under ADA "Emotional support animals, comfort animals, and therapy dogs are not service animals under Title II and Title III of the ADA" https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet

I have encountered many service animals in my life, they have always been well behaved. When we start talking about comfort animals it is a completely different story. Why is there a Chihuahua on a leash barking at everyone at Disneyland, shaking and scared? My bet this person can't go without their pet for a few hours so they torture their pet, put a service dog vest on it, and take it to one of the most crowded places around. I see Rich ladies with their purse dogs there as well. We have a friend who actually trains service animals, she takes the dogs to Disneyland and there is a night and day difference these animals.

Make it clear I am in no way arguing service dogs, I am arguing emotional animals, people who claim that they are service dogs, which is illegal. I probably won't see eye to eye on you on this one. Schools now have special tables for children who bring peanuts, airlines will make announcements about a peanut allergy and accommodations for that allergy, we however don't get these accommodations. I get that and have accepted that, we just have to carry medicine with us.

Once again this does not apply to properly trained service animals. I have had emotional animals jump on me, I have had to pick my son up to get him away from an ESA animal. They are not trained and do not belong in the same places.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

FAC said:


> Be nice  i haven't experienced my 15 min of fame yet in my life. Thought maybe I'd get a shot on this forum. What if I were to die today and not experience my 15 min of fame? I bet you'd feel bad ​


Nope not me, my real job puts me in very close contact with celebs both real and reality types. I'll stay behind the scenes.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

devilmountain said:


> So not being able to breath for both of us is a very serious issue, not a comfort issue. We frequent many public places where there are fake service animals, they are easy to spot. Comfort animals maybe, but they are not entitled to the same privileges as a service animal.
> 
> ESA are not covered under ADA "Emotional support animals, comfort animals, and therapy dogs are not service animals under Title II and Title III of the ADA" https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet
> 
> ...


I'm not disagreeing with you entirely. I believe there should be hotel rooms that are pet free for people like you. But I also should be able to stay in a hotel with my service dog. I have no issue with hotels separating rooms dogs/no dogs. It's like in the old days requesting smoking and no smoking rooms.

I said for MOST people allergies are inconvenient. I grew up with sever allergies requiring allergy shots twice a week in addition to avoiding most foods. I also know that for some allergies can be deadly. For those they carry an epi pen.

Can't you find any compassion for the men and women who chose to enlist to serve this country then come back with emotional scars. Emotional support dogs do wonders for them. I hope that you or no one in your family ever suffers from mental illness or PTSD. Those who haven't have no understanding how debilitating it can be for someone.

Although not legally required my dog was professional trained to be a service dog for me. But some people can't afford professional training. So they train the doc themselves to do specific tasks. The dog vests and registrations online is just a big money making scam. Service dogs neither need to wear a vest or be registered. The owner just has to answer two questions 1- is that a service dog 2- what specific task does it perform.

Although ESA standards are different federally the state may have different laws. State laws can't restrict federal laws but they can provide less restrictions. Meaning in some states and municipalities people with ESA have the same rights as people with service dogs.


----------



## txtim1982 (Jan 5, 2016)

devilmountain said:


> Make it clear I am in no way arguing service dogs, I am arguing emotional animals, people who claim that they are service dogs, which is illegal. I probably won't see eye to eye on you on this one. Schools now have special tables for children who bring peanuts, airlines will make announcements about a peanut allergy and accommodations for that allergy, we however don't get these accommodations. I get that and have accepted that, we just have to carry medicine with us.
> 
> Once again this does not apply to properly trained service animals. I have had emotional animals jump on me, I have had to pick my son up to get him away from an ESA animal. They are not trained and do not belong in the same places.


I don't know you, so I am not going to pretend I know your plight. However, driving for Uber/Lyft/GetMe/OneRide means you are in the service industry by choice and as such are required to perform a service to individuals. If you are unable to perform that service, make the choice to leave it. Much like I cannot perform tasks that require heavy lifting due to injuries I've sustained, therefore, I choose not to pursue employment in a job that requires heavy lifting.

Lumping all Emotional Support Animals as out of control mongrols is just absurd. As I pointed out in a previous post, and FAC quoted, they do a job that could not be done otherwise. You have a choice on how to handle your business, but assuming that people that need ESAs are just losers that can't be apart from a pet is just narrow-minded and selfish.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Fireguy50 said:


> 2 hours of sleep with high levels of narcotics.........
> 
> Does the 1st or 2nd amendment apply to service animals?
> Do they have the right to publicly assemble and protest our opinions?
> ...


If this thread is "featured/famous" I'm most proud of this idea.
And I got prescribed higher dose narcotics today!


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> 2 hours of sleep with high levels of narcotics.........
> 
> Does the 1st or 2nd amendment apply to service animals?
> Do they have the right to publicly assemble and protest our opinions?
> ...


I think the answer to questions 1&2 are no.

The answer to 3- you can only shoot the animal if your directly under attack and can prove it. Recent dispute in Denver when a neighbor shot his neighbors dog claiming dog was attacking him. The shooter was charged until their was evidence he was under attack. Easier to kill a human under the make my day law in Denver than it is a dog.

Rightfully so. My personal beliefs that all beings are allowed to be. No creature is any more or less important than another. Stated differently, I believe the life of a dog is no more or less significant than a human. Only when we are under attack by a predictor do we have the right to kill another. Yes I'm one of those that traps a spider and takes it outside.


----------



## Fireguy50 (Nov 23, 2015)

Circle of Life young Jedi


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fireguy50 said:


> Circle of Life young Jedi


Fireguy50 you gotta stop with the videos. You're gonna make me laugh myself to death!


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

So the local ADA office just returned my call. I thanked the woman for calling and said how I believe I already have the answer to my question. She confirmed what we discussed here. There are several cases in court, the DOJ runs the ADA and who knows when the court will make their rulings.

What was interesting though, which I don't believe has been mentioned much on this or other threads is how a disabled pax with an ADA dog can file a complaint, with the ADA even though they might not have a legitimate complaint. I mean we don't have a ruling yet. The representative said you file it so they have a record of people being discriminated and so they can deal with it after these verdicts.

You could tell the woman was disabled, she had trouble speaking. Very polite, knowledgeable, professional. It's really wrong how people like her get treated. Travass should hire people like her instead of overseas. Be thankful you don't have these conditions next time you decide not to take a disabled pax with an ADA dog, wheelchair or something.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> So the local ADA office just returned my call. I thanked the woman for calling and said how I believe I already have the answer to my question. She confirmed what we discussed here. There are several cases in court, the DOJ runs the ADA and who knows when the court will make their rulings.
> 
> What was interesting though, which I don't believe has been mentioned much on this or other threads is how a disabled pax with an ADA dog can file a complaint, with the ADA even though they might not have a legitimate complaint. I mean we don't have a ruling yet. The representative said you file it so they have a record of people being discriminated and so they can deal with it after these verdicts.
> 
> You could tell the woman was disabled, she had trouble speaking. Very polite, knowledgeable, professional. It's really wrong how people like her get treated. Travass should hire people like her instead of overseas. Be thankful you don't have these conditions next time you decide not to take a disabled pax with an ADA dog, wheelchair or something.


Thank you for taking your time to follow up on this. It's unfortunate that 5 Star Guy and Beur had to go out of their way and spend their own valuable time to learn the laws that should have been provided to us by uber. Especially since uber and Lyft are involved in several lawsuits on this matter.

Here is an interesting read, a bit dated since it was published in 2015. But still relevant. 
http://fortune.com/2015/05/22/uber-lyft-disabled/


----------



## expoolman (Oct 7, 2015)

FAC said:


> I'm *allergic* to people who hate dogs.
> 
> I'm also *allergic* to pax that don't tip.
> 
> ...


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

expoolman said:


> You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.


Perhaps not but I do know what the word sarcasm means


----------



## Coffeekeepsmedriving (Oct 2, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.
> 
> Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.
> 
> ...


I hate dogs in my car...pax..put the dogs in your own car.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

Seems there's more to this story. Just saw this cross the wires...

http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/30/uber-proposes-guide-dog-settlement/

Sounds like Uber will update the app to allow disabled people to note that they are carrying a service animal. Hopefully Uber will update the Partner app to flag drivers that have documented allergies...

... because if they don't, the onus is on us to protest until they do.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Seems there's more to this story. Just saw this cross the wires...
> 
> http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/30/uber-proposes-guide-dog-settlement/
> 
> ...


That's great and does back what I've said. The whole allergy claim sounds weak. I guess people with dog allergies, never get an allergy attack outside their car? I have seasonal allergies, what about peanut allergies? I knew someone who claimed he couldn't be in the same room if there was just one peanut in it.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> That's great and does back what I've said. The whole allergy claim sounds weak. I guess people with dog allergies, never get an allergy attack outside their car? I have seasonal allergies, what about peanut allergies? I knew someone who claimed he couldn't be in the same room if there was just one peanut in it.


Frankly, you're wrong. Talk to an allergist. If a dog gets into my car, and leaves pet dander in there, it's dangerous. I could rear-end a car sneezing, and kill someone. Period. End of discussion.

It all depends on the blood serum levels of the allergy, and the user's response to the stimulus. You can have tolerable pet allergies, and you can have violent pet allergies. Obviously, the latter is a smaller group.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Frankly, you're wrong. Talk to an allergist. If a dog gets into my car, and leaves pet dander in there, it's dangerous. I could rear-end a car sneezing, and kill someone. Period. End of discussion.
> 
> It all depends on the blood serum levels of the allergy, and the user's response to the stimulus. You can have tolerable pet allergies, and you can have violent pet allergies. Obviously, the latter is a smaller group.


Sneezing? Please. People die from peanut allergies, they don't sneeze. Big case around here was at a restaurant. The woman asked the waitress if the salad dressing had nuts in it and the waitress said no. The woman died at the table.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> Sneezing? Please. People die from peanut allergies, they don't sneeze. Big case around here was at a restaurant. The woman asked the waitress if the salad dressing had nuts in it and the waitress said no. The woman died at the table.


Sorry, it's not safe and you are wrong. Again, talk to a doctor who is certified as an allergist. They wouldn't risk their career to put that in writing to Uber, and have offered to sign that letter if need be.

I can sneeze so violently I can't see straight. Then I either slam on my brakes and get rear-ended, or crash into the car in front of me. End of discussion, it's not safe.... again.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Sorry, it's not safe and you are wrong. Again, talk to a doctor who is certified as an allergist. They wouldn't risk their career to put that in writing to Uber, and have offered to sign that letter if need be.
> 
> I can sneeze so violently I can't see straight. Then I either slam on my brakes and get rear-ended, or crash into the car in front of me. End of discussion, it's not safe.... again.


I do sneeze in my car, not like that. Get the car detailed then, or maybe this job isn't for you or as you pointed out, you'll probably get tossed. An over the counter pill should resolve it.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> I do sneeze in my car, not like that. Get the car detailed then, or maybe this job isn't for you or as you pointed out, you'll probably get tossed. An over the counter pill should resolve it.


Sorry but ADA does protect me, and I won't respond to your argument that I shouldn't be allowed to drive for Uber (sarcastically/passive-agressively written as "this isn't the job for you.")

Frankly, it's disrespectful.

All Uber needs to do is add a flag on the partner side to let drivers with documented allergies not get ride requests from service animals. If they're implementing one side (Uber app flagging of service animal passengers), the other is just as easy to implement.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Sorry but ADA does protect me, and I won't respond to your argument that I shouldn't be allowed to drive for Uber (sarcastically/passive-agressively written as "this isn't the job for you.")
> 
> Frankly, it's disrespectful.
> 
> All Uber needs to do is add a flag on the partner side to let drivers with documented allergies not get ride requests from service animals. If they're implementing one side (Uber app flagging of service animal passengers), the other is just as easy to implement.


It just sounds silly at this point. So you don't have allergy attacks like I do, from dogs then? What do you do? You're aware of the allergy so I hate to assume but you must have a solution that works for you?


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> It just sounds silly at this point. So you don't have allergy attacks like I do, from dogs then? What do you do? You're aware of the allergy so I hate to assume but you must have a solution that works for you?


Couldn't disagree more with everything you just said. My above reply stands. Have a nice day.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Well that sums it up then.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


>


It's that kind of disrespect that will let Uber win against drivers. When drivers start saying other drivers - with legitimate concerns - shouldn't be driving, we're a fractured group.

Enjoy that green smiley face. Travis is looking green with joy.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I've never heard of anyone dying from dog allergies so no I don't take you seriously. No worse than my allergies, no matter where I drive I have allergies in the spring, even without a pax or an ADA dog. I would suggest you stop driving until they do add that to the app, that or wait for a driver who does take the ADA dog, so you don't get tossed.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> I've never heard of anyone dying from dog allergies so no I don't take you seriously. No worse than my allergies, no matter where I drive I have allergies in the spring, even without a pax or an ADA dog. I would suggest you stop driving until they do add that to the app, that or wait for a driver who does take the ADA dog, so you don't get tossed.


Assuming Uber's current policy on drivers with documented allergies is unchanged by this settlement - that is certainly what* all of us *with violent allergies will keep doing.

My concern is two-fold. One that Uber's settlement (yesterday!) might impact that semi-informal policy (since I still can't find the video of it in my market). And two, that Uber is going to great lengths to protect pax, but not drivers on with ADA-protected special needs. If they are implementing both protections jointly, it would be rather trivial to address in the Uber partner app, right in the existing Special Needs section of the app for drivers.

As to the rest, I'll keep saying it - you need to talk to a professional allergist, because your opinions lack clinical merit. Driving with a high blood serum allergy (to animal/dog dander), and a dog in the car, is dangerous to the driver and the cars around. That driver is fine to drive for Uber, so long as there aren't animals in the vehicle.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Assuming Uber's current policy on drivers with documented allergies is unchanged by this settlement - that is certainly what* all of us *with violent allergies will keep doing.
> 
> My concern is two-fold. One that Uber's settlement (yesterday!) might impact that semi-informal policy (since I still can't find the video of it in my market). And two, that Uber is going to great lengths to protect pax, but not drivers on with ADA-protected special needs. If they are implementing both protections jointly, it would be rather trivial to address in the Uber partner app, right in the existing Special Needs section of the app for drivers.
> 
> As to the rest, I'll keep saying it - you need to talk to a professional allergist, because your opinions lack clinical merit. That's a nice way of saying you have no idea what you're saying, by the way. Driving with a high blood serum allergy, and a dog in the car, is dangerous to the driver and the cars around. That driver is fine to drive for Uber, so long as there aren't animals in the vehicle.


So I take it none of your friends or family or neighbor has a dog, you've never had an allergy attack but you know you're allergic and there is nothing you can do about it, especially in a store that allowed a dog in, ADA or otherwise. There is treatment for your allergy, pills, shots, nasal administration, someone who depends on an ADA dog doesn't have that luxury you have. I would be very cautious driving, like I am when I start sneezing when driving in the spring. I don't have the luxury of driving indoors.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> So I take it none of your friends or family or neighbor has a dog, you've never had an allergy attack but you know you're allergic and there is nothing you can do about it, especially in a store that allowed a dog in, ADA or otherwise. There is treatment for your allergy, pills, shots, nasal administration, someone who depends on an ADA dog doesn't have that luxury you have. I would be very cautious driving, like I am when I start sneezing for driving in the spring. I don't have the luxury of driving indoors.


Neighbors aren't an issue, because you're not in an enclosed space. But yes, none of my family has dogs. They respect my allergy as a disability beyond my control.

Uber recognizes my allergy and concern - they made a policy and a video about it. Sorry you don't, but please leave this thread to others that do.


----------



## TomInVegas (Apr 18, 2016)

HoldenDriver said:


> I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.
> 
> Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.
> 
> ...


Your way.

Simple.

Pose the question.

Q: Which has been around longer and more prevalent in our society? Allergies vs the current American mania (you don't see this everywhere in the world) to somehow make everywhere a "safe place" with "service pets " inconveniencing many?

It's clear this is likely another feeeeeeeel good US societal fad for the special 'snowflakes' of us out there, like missing kids on milk cartons or some 'scales-challenged' shoppers at Walmart who simply don't need a scooter as they are not certified as disabled and this take them from those who truly need.

Not PC, I know. But our society needs frankness at times otherwise it gets over the top. I know airlines are having a big problem with this right now.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

TomInVegas said:


> Q: Which has been around longer and more prevalent in our society? Allergies vs the current American mania (you don't see this everywhere in the world) to somehow make everywhere a "safe place" with "service pets " inconveniencing many?


Definitely a cultural thing. In Mexico you don't see young women carrying around accessory dogs. Dogs in that country are generally used as security devices and almost all live outside in the yard, rarely if ever being allowed indoors. Domestic animal vets don't do all that well there; the dog is considered disposable - if it "breaks" you throw it away and get another one.

I doubt this emotional dog fad exists in other places like China etc either, where the dog is just as likely to be on the menu as snivelling and shaking in some young woman's arms.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

The US wasn't always like that, all countries grow and develop, at some point. A simple sheet on the back seat and a pill would solve any driver's problem, the pax has to live with their disability everyday.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> The US wasn't always like that, all countries grow and develop, at some point. A simple sheet on the back seat and a pill would solve any driver's problem, the pax has to live with their disability everyday.


I'll say it each time you say this incorrect stuff - go talk to a board certified allergist. You really will feel bad for what you're posting now when he or she sets you straight.

Uber wouldn't have the policy that they do for people like me, if it were that simple.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

http://www.webmd.com/allergies/guide/dog-allergies


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> http://www.webmd.com/allergies/guide/dog-allergies


Please don't troll this thread with replies to URLs. Thanks.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Please don't troll this thread with replies to URLs. Thanks.


The link has good information on dog allergies. As I've said if your allergies are that severe, more than sneezing like hives, then you are taking a chance with every pax who might have dog dander on them, from their dogs. Dander does not fly around in a car, Dander is on the dog or on the car seat that a sheet will catch. The way you talk sounds like the dog is jumping all around with dander flying all over the place. The dog sits in the back seat for a few minutes and gets out. I would not recommend driving if you break out in hives, that's like going for a hike in a field full of bees when you are allergic. This thread is for everyone to be aware of.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> This thread is for everyone to be aware of.


Yes, but you're going bi-polar. There are a group of people that are capable of driving, but exposure to pet dander in high enough concentrations is a problem.

_I fail to see why you are arguing with Uber._ Uber has a policy! This thread established it! I'm fine with it (so long as this new settlement doesn't change it). *The only one that seems not to be, is you.*


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

It doesn't sound like you have a good understanding of dog dander so I was trying to show you. We are talking about ADA dogs, not pets who might not be well taken care of, who don't have baths regularly or not brushed often. Dander is dead skin, it's not the fur. You sound more like it's a fear than your experience with an ADA dog that is well behaved and well taken care of. A sheet will eliminate most of your fear, and a pill. Yes, find a driver if you are that concerned, especially if you break out in hives. I don't have a choice with seasonal allergies, I drive or can't. No one dies from dog allergies like peanut.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> It doesn't sound like you have a good understanding of dog dander so I was trying to show you. We are talking about ADA dogs, not pets who might not be well taken care of, who don't have baths regularly or not brushed often. Dander is dead skin, it's not the fur. You sound more like it's a fear than your experience with an ADA dog that is well behaved and well taken care of. A sheet will eliminate most of your fear, and a pill. Yes, find a driver if you are that concerned, especially if you break out in hives. I don't have a choice with seasonal allergies, I drive or can't. No one dies from dog allergies like peanut.


You keep comparing dog allergies to peanut allergies. Again, the only person that has a problem with Uber's policy on drivers like me - is you. You can keep wasting your life to thread bump, but guess what? Uber agrees with me, and not you, on how to handle this situation. So I really don't care.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.
> 
> Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.
> 
> .


The whole question here is whether or not Uber is a "public accommodation" or not, or just some American sharing with another in the sharing economy.

Difficult to say, its sort of a legal question

Of course Uber can delete anyone from the app at any time, or any reason or no reason at all. But legally, its a difficult question as to whether or not this is an ADA problem or not.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

I_Like_Spam said:


> Of course Uber can delete anyone from the app at any time, or any reason or no reason at all.


Somewhat, but not totally... they can fire independent contractors "without cause" - but if there is an apparent/proximate cause that runs afoul of the law (such as terminating a driver because Uber didn't want to accommodate a driver's ADA disability), then Title 3 applies and they cannot.

Just because ADA Title 3 may not apply to pax, doesn't mean it doesn't apply to drivers. Title 3 absolutely applies to drivers, as a business relationship exists between the driver, and Uber.

The pax question surrounding Title 3 is far more difficult because of the nature of ridesharing. If someone is legitimately sharing a ride, does a business relationship exist between pax and the driver? Or is that relationship purely between Uber on both sides of the equation? We don't know, and I don't think Uber knows - the courts probably will have to decide.

I think that's why the driver-allergy policy came before last weekend's settlement, and not the other way around.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

Well according to Uber your allergies do NOT afford you the ability to refuse to take service animals.

_There are several new rules that Uber drivers will have to abide by under the settlement. They will have to affirmatively agree to accept service animals in their car and acknowledge that there are no exceptions for allergies or religious reasons. They will also not be able to charge a cleaning fee for accepting a service animal._
_
http://www.law.com/sites/articles/2016/05/01/uber-settles-blind-riders-discrimination-claims/_


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

D Town said:


> Well according to Uber your allergies do NOT afford you the ability to refuse to take service animals.
> 
> _There are several new rules that Uber drivers will have to abide by under the settlement. They will have to affirmatively agree to accept service animals in their car and acknowledge that there are no exceptions for allergies or religious reasons. They will also not be able to charge a cleaning fee for accepting a service animal.
> 
> http://www.law.com/sites/articles/2016/05/01/uber-settles-blind-riders-discrimination-claims/_


I haven't seen Uber say that themselves. If they do, I'll file an ADA complaint the first time it becomes an issue. Uber needs to square the circle between the old policy and new one. If both stay in effect, then the PR reply above is window dressing.

And, since I opted out of binding arbitration, I'll then walk right up the street and file for wrongful termination due to violation of ADA.

I'm not going to risk my safety, and I have no problem racking up an ADA fine for Uber.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

The good news is you get $25 when you get tossed.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> I haven't seen Uber say that themselves. If they do, I'll file an ADA complaint the first time it becomes an issue. Uber needs to square the circle between the old policy and new one. If both stay in effect, then the PR reply above is window dressing.
> 
> And, since I opted out of binding arbitration, I'll then walk right up the street and file for wrongful termination due to violation of ADA.
> 
> I'm not going to risk my safety, and I have no problem racking up an ADA fine for Uber.


Being disabled and having a dog allergy are two different issues. You might be disabled and you might have a dog allergy. Having a dog allergy alone is not a disability.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

D Town said:


> _*They will also not be able to charge a cleaning fee for accepting a service animal.*_


As I have said before, UberLyft and many others including the press demonstrate _no _in-depth understanding of the ADA rules on service dogs. Therefore you cannot take anything that is published by third parties on this subject at face value and should always go direct to the source for information. For example, from ada.gov i.e. the official, definitive source of guidance:

_*"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."*_


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

elelegido said:


> As I have said before, UberLyft and many others including the press demonstrate _no _in-depth understanding of the ADA rules on service dogs. Therefore you cannot take anything that is published by third parties on this subject at face value and should always go direct to the source for information. For example, from ada.gov i.e. the official, definitive source of guidance:
> 
> _*"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."*_


While that is true, it is also true that a hotel can't charge a fee for an ADA dog the way they normally charge a fee for a pet.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

5 Star Guy said:


> While that is true, it is also true that a hotel can't charge a fee for an ADA dog the way they normally charge a fee for a pet.


Correct, the ADA rules say that a fee may be chargeable to a service dog handler only if the animal causes damage. A blanket charge for a service animal just being in or at a facility would not be legal.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

elelegido said:


> As I have said before, UberLyft and many others including the press demonstrate _no _in-depth understanding of the ADA rules on service dogs. Therefore you cannot take anything that is published by third parties on this subject at face value and should always go direct to the source for information. For example, from ada.gov i.e. the official, definitive source of guidance:
> 
> _*"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."*_


They aren't saying the service animal can turn your car inside out with no penalty they're saying you can't charge a cleaning fee for pet hair. If the dog vomits, pees, or takes a dump you can still charge.

And if YOU want to go with, "Bah! Lamestream media." and ignore it that's on you, bud. Good luck with that but at this point you're trying to will laws and protections into existence that don't actually exist.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

D Town said:


> And if YOU want to go with, "Bah! Lamestream media." and ignore it that's on you, bud. Good luck with that but at this point you're trying to will laws and protections into existence that don't actually exist.


Yes, but ADA Title 3 protections do exist for drivers with allergies. Uber admitted as much when they crafted their stand-with-pax-wait-for-2nd-driver policy.

And Uber can fix this. They just need a simple SQL flag in their server for drivers with documented allergies. Mail Uber the lab work or a doctor letter, and you then don't get ride requests from pax with service animals. Simple, easy. They just need to do that.

I think Uber will square this circle, but it will take time. One hand isn't talking to the other at Uber, I suspect... as usual.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

No one is forcing anyone to drive. I do feel bad if allergies are that bad, however there is a treatment for it. If you plan to continue to drive, I suggest getting the treatment or don't drive, which continues to be my point. A sheet on the back seat with the windows closed will solve most of the allergy symptoms. Carefully toss the sheet in a garbage bag in the trunk after the ride. It is highly unlikely you will ever get an ADA dog pax and even less likely to have two pax in one day. Shake out the sheet outside your house, roll it up in a bag and toss it in the wash. Take a shower and change your clothes so any remaining dander is gone. Take an over the counter pill and drive the next day. Call your Dr. about any treatment available that ends your allergies, not treating the reaction.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy, we'll keep beating around the bush on this one for centuries. Uber agreed, at least at one point, people like me deserve an ADA Title 3 accommodation. I believe they still feel that way - and this is sorting itself out internally right now.

So, we're just going to have to agree to disagree, unless you want to troll this thread with repeats of the same points.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Yes, but ADA Title 3 protections do exist for drivers with allergies. Uber admitted as much when they crafted their stand-with-pax-wait-for-2nd-driver policy.
> 
> And Uber can fix this. They just need a simple SQL flag in their server for drivers with documented allergies. Mail Uber the lab work or a doctor letter, and you then don't get ride requests from pax with service animals. Simple, easy. They just need to do that.
> 
> I think Uber will square this circle, but it will take time. One hand isn't talking to the other at Uber, I suspect... as usual.


I see what you're saying, however if I had to bet or guess, I'd say that is for employees of the business entity. Since you are an independent contractor they will toss you and find three people to replace you, it might not be right but that is much easier for this horrible company Travass runs.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I'm trying to help you and others understand, that's all. This is breaking news on their part and it doesn't look like that is an option any longer. I do agree with them and feel bad for you. I feel worse for the pax who relies on their ADA dog and can't count on drivers like you.


----------



## HoldenDriver (Jan 18, 2016)

5 Star Guy said:


> I'm trying to help you and others understand, that's all. This is breaking news on their part and it doesn't look like that is an option any longer. I do agree with them and feel bad for you. I feel worse for the pax who relies on their ADA dog and can't count on drivers like you.


Uber would have to face their previous policy at an ADA hearing (not to mention a CA Labor Commissioner hearing - which I am entitled to based on the last EDD ruling) when that deactivation happens. Uber would have to answer why they had a previous policy that drivers with allergies did warrant protection - and a special protocol. Uber can't deny they held that Title 3-compliant opinion - at least, previously.

And they may still. The only place I've heard Uber say this week that drivers with allergies have to "just take it" is in a third-party press report on a site I've never read before.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

HoldenDriver said:


> Uber would have to face their previous policy at an ADA hearing (not to mention a CA Labor Commissioner hearing - which I am entitled to based on the last EDD ruling) when that deactivation happens. Uber would have to answer why they had a previous policy that drivers with allergies did warrant protection - and a special protocol. Uber can't deny they held that Title 3-compliant opinion - at least, previously.
> 
> And they may still. The only place I've heard Uber say this week that drivers with allergies have to "just take it" is in a third-party press report on a site I've never read before.


That's what makes this a horrible company. They have changed their policies, this is not the first or last. The only thing that matters is their current policy. There a lot of things drivers need to know that they were afraid to inform for fear of making independent contractors an employee. This is just another example. What you quote I believe is for a private car. I could be wrong, it's late here.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

D Town said:


> They aren't saying the service animal can turn your car inside out with no penalty they're saying you can't charge a cleaning fee for pet hair.


Who is "they?" And where did "they" mention pet hair?


> And if YOU want to go with, "Bah! Lamestream media." and ignore it that's on you, bud.


I'm not following you, bud - what is it that you think I'm ignoring?


> Good luck with that


Again, not following you; good luck with what?


> at this point you're trying to will laws and protections into existence that don't actually exist.


The text I quoted from the ADA website actually does exist - it exists on the ADA.gov website, which is where I copied and pasted it from. Again, not sure what you're trying to get at.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Who is "they?" And where did "they" mention pet hair?
> I'm not following you, bud - what is it that you think I'm ignoring?
> Again, not following you; good luck with what?
> The text I quoted from the ADA website actually does exist - it exists on the ADA.gov website, which is where I copied and pasted it from. Again, not sure what you're trying to get at.


I didn't think I needed to explain this but since its not clear:

"They" = Uber and I used pet hair as an example because there isn't much else that springs to mind that a dog can leave as a mess that it really can't control.

As for the quote you copied I wasn't referring to that.

All the rest I'm going to leave to your imagination.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

FAC said:


> Thank you for taking your time to follow up on this. It's unfortunate that 5 Star Guy and Beur had to go out of their way and spend their own valuable time to learn the laws that should have been provided to us by uber. Especially since uber and Lyft are involved in several lawsuits on this matter.
> 
> Here is an interesting read, a bit dated since it was published in 2015. But still relevant.
> http://fortune.com/2015/05/22/uber-lyft-disabled/


If you're a contractor (and most don't go into this expecting anything else) dealing with the public you should know the law re service animals.

Uber shouldn't NEED to spoonfeed us the law.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

TomInVegas said:


> Your way.
> 
> Simple.
> 
> ...


Missing kids on milk cartons are special snowflakes? Where did THAT come from?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

elelegido said:


> Definitely a cultural thing. In Mexico you don't see young women carrying around accessory dogs. Dogs in that country are generally used as security devices and almost all live outside in the yard, rarely if ever being allowed indoors. Domestic animal vets don't do all that well there; the dog is considered disposable - if it "breaks" you throw it away and get another one.
> 
> I doubt this emotional dog fad exists in other places like China etc either, where the dog is just as likely to be on the menu as snivelling and shaking in some young woman's arms.


And you somehow think Mexico and China are doing things better than us? What exactly is your point? We should be more like them?


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> And you somehow think Mexico and China are doing things better than us? What exactly is your point? We should be more like them?


So funny, almost spit out my breakfast.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

D Town said:


> I didn't think I needed to explain this but since its not clear:
> 
> "They" = Uber and I used pet hair as an example because there isn't much else that springs to mind that a dog can leave as a mess that it really can't control.
> 
> ...


LOL; this is like attempting a conversation with my ex wife when I have no idea what she is trying to say . Oh well...

"They" = Uber?? I see no evidence that Uber has said "no cleaning charge for service animals". I see that a news report said that there will be no such charges, but I see no direct quote from Uber to such an effect. Pro tip - just because you read it in a news article, it doesn't mean it's true.

And I see no mention of pet hair published by any source.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> And you somehow think Mexico and China are doing things better than us? What exactly is your point? We should be more like them?


Wanna fight? Huh? HUH??!!

You seem to be a little more grouchy than usual this morning, Fuzzyelvis.


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> And you somehow think Mexico and China are doing things better than us? What exactly is your point? We should be more like them?


 Well I think it would interesting eating some meals while sitting in lotusposition, or using chopsticks to eat speghetti and cheeseburgers etc. We could have more pinyada(sp) parties for our children.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

ChortlingCrison said:


> Well I think it would interesting eating some meals while sitting in lotusposition, or using chopsticks to eat speghetti and cheeseburgers etc. We could have more pinyada(sp) parties for our children.


I believe that the Chinese make better Chinese food than we do. They make better Chinese food than I do, anyway.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

elelegido said:


> LOL; this is like attempting a conversation with my ex wife when I have no idea what she is trying to say . Oh well...
> 
> "They" = Uber?? I see no evidence that Uber has said "no cleaning charge for service animals". I see that a news report said that there will be no such charges, but I see no direct quote from Uber to such an effect. Pro tip - just because you read it in a news article, it doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> And I see no mention of pet hair published by any source.


You're a Well Known Member, you should know how the company is run by now. The less Travass says about anything negative the better. This is another area that recently popped up and he has been paying in fines more than most companies make, ever. The newest one that FAC has discovered is drivers not getting paid, and not having any proof of the mistake. There have been plenty of issues with them and there will be more. The next one will be with the airports and providing a percentage of drivers with vans who can take more people in wheelchairs. Travass' strategy has always been do it and deal with it later. Not sure why you first question an article like the entire thing is made up and you want to believe Travass on top of it?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

5 Star Guy said:


> You're a Well Known Member, you should know how the company is run by now. The less Travass says about anything negative the better. This is another area that recently popped up and he has been paying in fines more than most companies make, ever. The newest one that FAC has discovered is drivers not getting paid, and not having any proof of the mistake. There have been plenty of issues with them and there will be more. The next one will be with the airports and providing a percentage of drivers with vans who can take more people in wheelchairs. Travass' strategy has always been do it and deal with it later. Not sure why you first question an article like the entire thing is made up and you want to believe Travass on top of it?


Not questioning anything, my friend. I don't know if Uber will start denying damage claims related to service dogs or not. All I am saying is that I see no evidence that they will. Other than a news article claiming this.

As we all know, news articles on Uber are very frequently wrong and not a reliable source of information.

So it's not a case of me believing Travis/Uber or not. For me there is nothing from them to believe or disbelieve regarding cleanup fees for service animals, as I have seen no policy statement direct from them on this specific point.

Uber is indeed a crap company, but they have always paid up when human pax have puked or pissed in their car. Maybe because it's their car; who knows!


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Not questioning anything, my friend. I don't know if Uber will start denying damage claims related to service dogs or not. All I am saying is that I see no evidence that they will. Other than a news article claiming this.
> 
> As we all know, news articles on Uber are very frequently wrong and not a reliable source of information.
> 
> So it's not a case of me believing Travis/Uber or not. For me there is nothing from them to believe or disbelieve regarding cleanup fees for service animals, as I have seen no policy statement direct from them on this specific point.


No problem, that's fine. I for one have never read an article that was wrong. Sometimes there's a follow-up when they say a driver raped someone and the driver was not really a driver, claimed to be one and the news made the correction, some of them at least bothered to.

ADA dogs are very well trained, the only thing you might have is some dander or fur on the seats from shedding if they are losing their winter coat like now that it's warmer. I wouldn't worry about it, just something people are making a big deal over when it isn't an issue at all.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

elelegido said:


> LOL; this is like attempting a conversation with my ex wife when I have no idea what she is trying to say . Oh well...
> 
> "They" = Uber?? I see no evidence that Uber has said "no cleaning charge for service animals". I see that a news report said that there will be no such charges, but I see no direct quote from Uber to such an effect. Pro tip - just because you read it in a news article, it doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> And I see no mention of pet hair published by any source.


Ex-wife, huh? Gonna leave that alone. Yeah I'm not going to engage in a debate where every obvious fact is disputed because someone didn't give the name, address, phone number, and blood type of everyone who said anything. Do what you want.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

HoldenDriver said:


> I have violent allergies to pet dander, confirmed via blood tests. It's not just my opinion - I have lab work to back it up.
> 
> Uber says I have to accept service animals, and in California - I'm guessing (with some good odds) it's illegal effectively to question anyone who claims an animal to be a service animal. Obviously, at some point a pax will not want me to cancel them out and claim it's a service animal regardless.
> 
> ...


So since you asked for advice I'm wondering if you have tried allergy shots. I have severe (life threatening if not controlled) asthma and am allergic to pretty much anything airborne. I get 4 shots (the maximum). It takes at least 6 months to notice a result, and when I started I was going 3 times a week to get my levels up. Many people don't stick with it because the change is so slow, but it has made a huge difference in my life. I'm in Houston and we have things growing year round. Dust mites are never killed off and they and grasses are worst allergens. I used to go through (literally, and that's not hyperbole) 1 to 2 full boxes if tissues a day. My nose was always sore, cracked, and it and my upper lip would even bleed. Plus, I couldn't go up 1 flight of stairs without using my inhaler, my asthma was so bad and allergies set it off. Now I get by with claritin and Flonase only for the allergies. Inhaled corticosteroid for the asthma, but it's not set off by allergies very much snymore.

Anyway, if you haven't tried shots, or tried, but gave up thinking it wasn't working, you may want to consider it again.

Also, your reaction to any one insult to your system is the result of additive effects. For instance, I'm allergic to pretty much all grasses, weeds, trees, molds, dust mites, cockroaches, dust mites, cats, dogs and horses. Likely also rodents, but I wasn't tested for those.

I may be fine if I'm only exposed to a few of these. Anyway I have cats and dogs and I'm NOT that allergic to dogs, but you do tend to develop a tolerance to the ones you're around all the time, and some are more allergenic than others to me--we do get new fosters in though and it takes a while for my system to adjust--mostly kittens though and they are less allergenic. If pollens etc are not high and I come home I may be fine with the cats. If pollen is high I may not have any issues outside and then when I pet the cats I'm sneezing. But it wasn't just the cats. They are just the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. So by getting ALL my allergies treated (except mice, which I work with and I'm working with my allergist on that as it's not a usual test) my reaction to any one is lessened.

Anyway, just a thought. I have good medical and have for many years and couldn't have done this without it. So that's always an issue if you don't.

FYI I always sneeze and sometimes end up using my inhaler at the vet's, so it's not a cure all. But now I don't sneeze uncontrollably all the time and worry about my asthma putting me in the emergency room.

I have cough variant asthma, btw, which is very dangerous. I simply cough without stopping and can't get any breath in. Because I don't wheeze and it starts fast, people don't believe I have an issue until I'm passing out, so I get how bad things can get.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> So since you asked for advice I'm wondering if you have tried allergy shots. I have severe (life threatening if not controlled) asthma and am allergic to pretty much anything airborne. I get 4 shots (the maximum). It takes at least 6 months to notice a result, and when I started I was going 3 times a week to get my levels up. Many people don't stick with it because the change is so slow, but it has made a huge difference in my life. I'm in Houston and we have things growing year round. Dust mites are never killed off and they and grasses are worst allergens. I used to go through (literally, and that's not hyperbole) 1 to 2 full boxes if tissues a day. My nose was always sore, cracked, and it and my upper lip would even bleed. Plus, I couldn't go up 1 flight of stairs without using my inhaler, my asthma was so bad and allergies set it off. Now I get by with claritin and Flonase only for the allergies. Inhaled corticosteroid for the asthma, but it's not set off by allergies very much snymore.
> 
> Anyway, if you haven't tried shots, or tried, but gave up thinking it wasn't working, you may want to consider it again.
> 
> ...


Good God, I feel for you. Is there a reason why you didn't just move? I can't imagine putting up with all of that...


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

elelegido said:


> Wanna fight? Huh? HUH??!!
> 
> You seem to be a little more grouchy than usual this morning, Fuzzyelvis.


Well pulling up as an example of how we coddle our pets by implying that a country that skins them alive in order to eat them is better--yeah, I get grouchy.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

D Town said:


> Good God, I feel for you. Is there a reason why you didn't just move? I can't imagine putting up with all of that...


Move where? Yes, houston is bad, but I become allergic to whatever blooms wherever I live in 6 months. At least now I've been desensitized to many of the plants in houston. When I was younger I couldn't afford to move.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

D Town said:


> Ex-wife, huh? Gonna leave that alone. Yeah I'm not going to engage in a debate where every obvious fact is disputed because someone didn't give the name, address, phone number, and blood type of everyone who said anything. Do what you want.


Now your argument's getting a bit silly; I don't think anyone believes that addresses, phone numbers and blood types are relevant here.

You said, _"They (Uber) aren't saying the service animal can turn your car inside out with no penalty they're saying you can't charge a cleaning fee for pet hair."_ This is false. In reality, Uber has stated nothing of the kind - nothing about service dog cleaning charges specifically and neither have they mentioned pet hair in any way. The only source of what you are claiming is an online article and your own conjecture.

The point I made is that there is no confirmation direct from Uber that they will not process damage claims for service dog mess cleanups; there is only a claim to that effect in a news report. No more, no less.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

D Town said:


> Good God, I feel for you. Is there a reason why you didn't just move? I can't imagine putting up with all of that...


Oh, and the desert would be best for me, but I like vegetation...

Oh and my Neato robot vacuum. Because it can run when I'm not home. I can't vacuum because it stirs up too many dust mites. I also have covers on my mattresses and no carpet. If you make a concerted effort and address everything it really helps. But you have to be very proactive. "Just allergies" is a very annoying thing to hear when you're highly allergic. But it's just a chronic health problem like any other.

The worst thing for my asthma now is smokers getting in my car. I drive by anyone putting out their cigarette as I pull up. That and bleach.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Well pulling up as an example of how we coddle our pets by implying that a country that skins them alive in order to eat them is better--yeah, I get grouchy.


I didn't say it was better. Who said it was better?

I've never tried roast/fried/boiled dog. Maybe it's the most delicious foodstuff in the world; I wouldn't know.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Move where? Yes, houston is bad, but I become allergic to whatever blooms wherever I live in 6 months. At least now I've been desensitized to many of the plants in houston. When I was younger I couldn't afford to move.


Good point...I'd have probably moved into a plastic bubble...or Antarctica...


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Geez Fuzzyelvis I give you a lot of credit. All of that and driving and foster cats, that is really big.  Two thumbs up.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Seriously?! This discussion is still being debated?! Can't we just put the Service Dog to bed now?


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

elelegido said:


> I didn't say it was better. Who said it was better?
> 
> I've never tried roast/fried/boiled dog. Maybe it's the most delicious foodstuff in the world; I wouldn't know.


A friend of mine just returned from China and told me about this extraordinary meal she had. She loved it so much she requested another order. Only to have her Chinese waiter say not many Americans enjoy eating dog. True story! She was sick to her stomach all night.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> If you're a contractor (and most don't go into this expecting anything else) dealing with the public you should know the law re service animals.
> 
> Uber shouldn't NEED to spoonfeed us the law.


I don't disagree but this topic obviously has lead to much confusion there are nearly 340 posts here!


----------



## phillipzx3 (May 26, 2015)

Beur said:


> Exactly what I stated earlier a state law can be more restrictive than federal, but not less restrictive.


Federal law says pot is illegal. Oregon,Washington,Colorado and other States say its legal.

Federal law doesn't always trump State law.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

phillipzx3 Indeed Federal law does trump state law; even when it comes to marijuana. If you go to the whitehouse.gov there is a notice that although pot is legal for recreational use in a few states and medicinal use in others it's still considered illegal.

This debate is a messy one especially for the states it's legal. Law enforcement not doctors decide how to schedule drugs. That's why cocaine is level 2. But in the 1970s when Nixon created the DEA, they didn't see any medical use for marijuana even thought there are abundant medical tests proving otherwise. Six administrations and forty years later, no one has challenged the DEA law. So states have taken it upon themselves to make the changes. But until they either do away with scheduling drugs or change marijuana classification it will remain illegal federally.

Anyway back to the point. Because pot is still considered illegal federally none of the dispensaries are allowed to get bank accounts since all banks are insured by the FDIC. The empoyees of dispensaries are technically not allowed to deposit their cash wages in their individual accounts.

Then there was a very recent ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court on a case where a paraplegic used marijuana for medicinal use to ease his pain. He was fired from DirectTV for failing a drug test. He sued for unlawful termination on the grounds marijuana is legal under the Colorado constitution. The Colorado Supreme Court however ruled in favor of Direct TV because marijuana is considered illegal under federal law.


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

So I stumbled across an article re uber's policy on service dogs. It appears as part of a settlement in California if there is only one single complaint of an uber driver not accepting a pax with a service dog they will be deactivated. Also it seems uber will be sending out spies in California to ensure drivers comply with Ubers policy on service dogs. The settlement also states Uber will require that existing and new drivers confirm they understand their legal obligations to transport riders with guide dogs or other service animals.

So I guess that answers the service dog question. But I haven't heard anything from uber requiring me to confirm anything.

http://m.ocregister.com/articles/uber-714305-blind-service.html


----------



## Lnsky (Jan 2, 2016)

Can you get a medical bracelet?


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

It is interesting, a lot of these corporate regulations start in MA and CA lately and become Federal down the road. I would expect this to be rolled out nationwide soon, for anyone connected to this issue who wasn't already. I don't believe it has taken effect yet, very few of them state effective immediately.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

FAC said:


> So I stumbled across an article re uber's policy on service dogs. It appears as part of a settlement in California if there is only one single complaint of an uber driver not accepting a pax with a service dog they will be deactivated. Also it seems uber will be sending out spies in California to ensure drivers comply with Ubers policy on service dogs. The settlement also states Uber will require that existing and new drivers confirm they understand their legal obligations to transport riders with guide dogs or other service animals.
> 
> So I guess that answers the service dog question. But I haven't heard anything from uber requiring me to confirm anything.
> 
> http://m.ocregister.com/articles/uber-714305-blind-service.html


It's in the TOS somewhere I believe. Don't have time to look it up right now.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

phillipzx3 said:


> Federal law says pot is illegal. Oregon,Washington,Colorado and other States say its legal.
> 
> Federal law doesn't always trump State law.


WRONG! Just because the state won't prosecute you doesn't mean the Fed's can't/won't. The current administration is just willing to allow the experiment of legal pot run however a different administration can and could decide to waltz into every grow house and dispensary and shut every single one down and arrest all involved.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

It is on the ballot in MA to make it legal. Right now there is a very slow rollout, some say intentional now that medical use has been legal.


----------



## Rbar (May 8, 2016)

I don't believe you are correct. SOME People with disabilities LOVE telling people their rights matter more and 'they know'.. I have a hard time believing my ADA right are less valued then a pax. And I don't Know that I would be able to stand with a pax until someone comes. But I think I'll put a sign up that states severe asthma.. And therefore unfortunately won't be able to take any animals due to disability.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Rbar said:


> I don't believe you are correct. SOME People with disabilities LOVE telling people their rights matter more and 'they know'.. I have a hard time believing my ADA right are less valued then a pax. And I don't Know that I would be able to stand with a pax until someone comes. But I think I'll put a sign up that states severe asthma.. And therefore unfortunately won't be able to take any animals due to disability.


You sound like those "some people" yourself. Why can't you wait for another driver to take them? Waiting has nothing to do with your disability or asthma. They are waiting at your car door, outside with the windows closed. The driver will probably park in front or behind you so give them some room for them to park and make it easy for the pax to get in their car. That is your job. [It doesn't say that you have to carry their bag, help them in the other car, the idea is that they are safe and know that someone else will be taking them, soon.]


----------



## Rbar (May 8, 2016)

I don't have any issue with anyone waiting outside the car. That I agree with you on. The issue I have is the presumptive comments on here that drivers must 'just take it' even if it puts them in serious harms way. And without any recourse. Especially given the fact that we are independent contractors. The only other concern that no-one has addressed is how long is someone supposed to wait for 'said driver number two and who pays for that down time? If it takes an hour are we seriously supposed to wait an hour when given that some of us only drive 1-2 hrs at a time? And what of it exceeds the amount of time we can be left waiting given other independent contractor commitments? Seriously? Not to be difficult and really looking for an honest answer. There should be some guidelines here. Like, a back up driver will be found within no more than double standard time. Etc. and for the record? I love animals dogs etc. For me, I wouldn't want to take any risk of taking one animal and not another and then having a severe reaction because I was forced to take all. That's all. Just want an honest reply of reasonable expectations.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

5 Star Guy said:


> You sound like those "some people" yourself. Why can't you wait for another driver to take them? Waiting has nothing to do with your disability or asthma. They are waiting at your car door, outside with the windows closed. The driver will probably park in front or behind you so give them some room for them to park and make it easy for the pax to get in their car. That is your job. [It doesn't say that you have to carry their bag, help them in the other car, the idea is that they are safe and know that someone else will be taking them, soon.]


Its no use, man. When some people get an idea stuck in their heads about what their "rights" are no amount of logic or reasoning is going to change their minds. Even if they end up in court over it and lose some of them will still insist they are in the right. You've listed the facts. That's all you can do and hope the reasonable people learn from it. The ones that continue to insist their right despite all logic and reason are lost causes.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

Rbar said:


> I don't have any issue with anyone waiting outside the car. That I agree with you on. The issue I have is the presumptive comments on here that drivers must 'just take it' even if it puts them in serious harms way. And without any recourse. Especially given the fact that we are independent contractors. The only other concern that no-one has addressed is how long is someone supposed to wait for 'said driver number two and who pays for that down time? If it takes an hour are we seriously supposed to wait an hour when given that some of us only drive 1-2 hrs at a time? And what of it exceeds the amount of time we can be left waiting given other independent contractor commitments? Seriously? Not to be difficult and really looking for an honest answer. There should be some guidelines here. Like, a back up driver will be found within no more than double standard time. Etc. and for the record? I love animals dogs etc. For me, I wouldn't want to take any risk of taking one animal and not another and then having a severe reaction because I was forced to take all. That's all. Just want an honest reply of reasonable expectations.


Any good driver who doesn't have a medical condition will take the pax, shouldn't be long at all. You need to wait for a driver that will take the pax, not a driver who doesn't. It is up to you how long to wait, you've already been tagged as refusing to take the pax at this point so you wait or get tossed.


----------



## os2wiz (Sep 30, 2015)

I'm curious. What if the passenger is a belligerent, rude, obnoxious person; one whom you wouldn't take whether disabled or not. As an independent contractor, shouldn't you be able to refuse service on that basis alone?


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

os2wiz said:


> I'm curious. What if the passenger is a belligerent, rude, obnoxious person; one whom you wouldn't take whether disabled it or not. As an independent contractor, shouldn't you be able to refuse service on that basis alone?


Like anywhere else, especially in NC or no he didn't,  you need to be able to show that the reason is justified and not because the pax has a disability. Good luck on that one.  The same thing applies, you must wait for another driver to take them. I have never met or heard of someone like that, who was disabled, then again I don't know many Chinese alcoholics.


----------



## HERR_UBERMENSCH (Jun 3, 2016)

I_Like_Spam said:


> The whole question here is whether or not Uber is a "public accommodation" or not, or just some American sharing with another in the sharing economy.
> 
> Difficult to say, its sort of a legal question
> 
> Of course Uber can delete anyone from the app at any time, or any reason or no reason at all. But legally, its a difficult question as to whether or not this is an ADA problem or not.


Have a read of the definition of Public Accommodation and you can clearly see Uber drivers are NOT.

https://askjan.org/links/adaglossary.htm


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> Have a read of the definition of Public Accommodation and you can clearly see Uber drivers are NOT.
> 
> https://askjan.org/links/adaglossary.htm


It doesn't matter anymore if it's ADA policy or not. It's now an Uber policy and you will be deactivated no questions asked if you refuse a pax with a service dog. You can thank the driver who put the blind mans seeing eye dog in the trunk for that new rule.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> Have a read of the definition of Public Accommodation and you can clearly see Uber drivers are NOT.


The ADA isn't the only law out there outlining the rights of people with service animals, there are state and local concerns as well. There is a story down in Florida where a driver was actually arrested for refusing a service animal. What you have to do in Dauphin County might be different (or might not) if you drive or pick someone up across the river in Cumberland


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

I_Like_Spam said:


> The ADA isn't the only law out there outlining the rights of people with service animals, there are state and local concerns as well. There is a story down in Florida where a driver was actually arrested for refusing a service animal. What you have to do in Dauphin County might be different (or might not) if you drive or pick someone up across the river in Cumberland


True. State and local municipalities may enact laws and rules that expand on the ADA laws but can't have laws that restrict the ADA laws. For example I think it was Georgia had a law that stated service dogs must wear a vest. That infringes on the rights those protected under ADA. So that's where ADA trumps state laws. But when local laws expands the rights it's perfectly legal.


----------



## 5 Star Guy (Nov 7, 2015)

I_Like_Spam said:


> The ADA isn't the only law out there outlining the rights of people with service animals, there are state and local concerns as well. There is a story down in Florida where a driver was actually arrested for refusing a service animal. What you have to do in Dauphin County might be different (or might not) if you drive or pick someone up across the river in Cumberland


I think that was discussed here or another thread. The driver was arrested for the car door hitting the pax, after refusing to take him. I'm sure the police threw the book at him for that one.


----------



## Ray H (Aug 14, 2015)

I hate picking up PAX with dogs specially when they say that their dog is guide dog and when you know they are lying


----------



## FAC (Mar 27, 2016)

Ray H said:


> I hate picking up PAX with dogs specially when they say that their dog is guide dog and when you know they are lying


How do you know for certain the pax is lying?


----------

