Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Uber sued for (drivers) allegedly refusing rides to the blind and putting a dog in the trunk [View all]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/09/10/uber-sued-for-allegedly-refusing-rides-to-the-blind-and-putting-a-dog-in-the-trunk/An advocacy group for the blind is suing the app-based ride-sharing service Uber, alleging the company discriminates against passengers with service dogs.
The federal civil rights suit filed Tuesday by the California chapter of the National Federation of the Blind cites instances in California and elsewhere when blind Uber customers summoned a car only to be refused a ride once the driver saw them with a service dog. In some cases, drivers allegedly abandoned blind travelers in extreme weather and charged cancellation fees after denying them rides, the complaint said.
The complaint filed in a Northern California District Court cites one instance where a California UberX driver put a service dog in the trunk and refused to pull over when the blind passenger realized where the animal was.
~ snip ~
Figuring out whether to treat Uber like a traditional taxi service or something else is the subject of heated debate across the country. Taxi services are required by federal law to serve the disabled, even if drivers are independent contractors.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Uber sued for (drivers) allegedly refusing rides to the blind and putting a dog in the trunk [View all]
FrodosPet
Sep 2014
OP
Ha! Seems like a huge push out there to denigrate Uber. I wonder who is behind this propaganda?
Pisces
Sep 2014
#3
Right, it's all a big plot to make the unregulated "ride-sharing" services look bad.
Gormy Cuss
Sep 2014
#4
Well the Taxi companies here in Portland regularly refuse service to people with Service Dogs
dilby
Sep 2014
#7
And those people have recourse, don't they. I heard about that one case, which ended with apologies
Bluenorthwest
Sep 2014
#8
obviously if you have had good luck with them, those blind people must be confused
CreekDog
Sep 2014
#27
I just told this story about the dog in the trunk to my former-cabbie husband.
Starry Messenger
Sep 2014
#5
You don't have to accept the ride. There is not a gun to your head. If someone tried to put my dog
Pisces
Sep 2014
#10
I am not going to put my dog in the trunk and accept a ride to prove a point. Are you crazy.
Pisces
Sep 2014
#16
Again, I ask the question: Fire the bad drivers or close down a company? Seems you are advocating
Pisces
Sep 2014
#18
You're the only one suggesting they close down UBER. People are saying UBER should follow the law
pnwmom
Sep 2014
#23
The blind passenger didn't SEE the dog being put in the trunk. And one who did refuse
pnwmom
Sep 2014
#13
I would sue anybody's ass for putting my dog in the truck of a car. That said,
magical thyme
Sep 2014
#11
People with disability dogs aren't required to get prior approval. Other people are required to
pnwmom
Sep 2014
#14
I agree with you. Religion shouldn't give one an affirmative right over another's rights.
NYC_SKP
Sep 2014
#31
I didn't say service dogs, I said they can disallow or charge additional fees for dogs, period.
NYC_SKP
Sep 2014
#38
They CANNOT. Service dogs or other service animals must be allowed without any extra fee.
pnwmom
Sep 2014
#39
This is my understanding of it, that's the policy for, say, classrooms or offices.
NYC_SKP
Sep 2014
#35
Yes, I've read it. It's still a paradox between different people under ADA. (nt)
NYC_SKP
Sep 2014
#41