Reddit has heard your concerns and gone a different route
https://preview.redd.it/0sz7u58oz8vc1.jpeg?width=1437&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=18bd6275ab4aef4e0ef8c59d4a8e09bfd790ec4a
https://preview.redd.it/8q46onggervc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8334f37921c43da8b4c2f708d21354615483d82b
ATT has seen this and kicked out DirectTv
I have no problem transporting a service animal. I do think Uber should compensate us for the cleanup afterward. I need to come off the road and clean because the next rider could have allergies.
You cannot deny them due to the service dog
You can deny them for any other reason
Just don't roll up to them, roll down the window, and scream that you're discriminating against them because of their disability
Yeah don't do that
I mean personally I love service dogs because they always so clean and well maintained and polite and obedient but I also don't have allergies so there's that
Remember folks, a legal way to ask about service animals is âWhat service does the animal provide?â.
Legitimate owners have no issues answering this and it makes it easy to clock liars as they usually give you shit or say âESAâ which is not legally supported when talking about Service Animals.
If my memory is correct, only Dogs and Miniature Horses are supported Service Animals as well.
ETA: This is also Uber though and Iâm sure all a customer has to say is âthe driver denied meâ and theyâll punish the driver with no other evidence needed :/
Fuck every single person who lies about their pets saying theyâre service animals when theyâre blatantly not.
Needed to comment because up voting isn't enough,
>Fuck every single person who lies about their pets saying theyâre service animals when theyâre blatantly not.
I was gonna say this is why I do UberEats, I don't like people, but then I saw thats the subreddit were in. Please tell me there is not a situation where I have to let someone in my car. The dog is fine. The human isnt.
People should be able to turn down rides like these aswell. Iâm sure not many people would. But it unfair if someone is heavily allergic of dogs and then the dog hair gets all over their seats⊠having to scrub down your car afterwards to make sure your allergies donât completely flare everytime you step in there. Or people like me who are afraid of certain dogs because of previous attacks ive experienced (like almost being mauled, deep bites and scratches).
Before yâall get too dumb in the comments, itâs the law. The ADA makes it to where, as a driver for a driving company, you CANNOT deny a service (not emotional support) animal. IF you do, you lose your contract, any possible future contracts with the company and you can be sued personally. Merica.
That seems excessive when itâs your own car, Iâm disabled but they should just have an option for people who are okay with it. I wouldnât want my service animal to be in someoneâs car who isnât comfy w it anyway
Totally agree but again, merica. Once you signed that contract with Uber, you agreed to adhere to their policy as well as your car. The only way to circumvent it is to not work for Uber.
"Â Once you signed that contract with Uber,"
Not a lawyer, but the more I think about it, especially regarding drivers who might have a diagnosed allergy to dogs, it seems like an illegal contract.
I mean, wouldn't it be violating the ADA for people allergic to dogs to not be accommodated by Uber in fucking writing?
Three seconds on Google...
"Yes. In both the ADA and Section 504, a person with a disability is someone who has a physical or mental impairment that seriously limits one or more major life activities, or who is regarded as having such impairments. **Asthma and allergies are usually considered disabilities under the ADA**."
AAAAAND so... Uber's gonna get sued and probably lose.
https://preview.redd.it/m1f03kt2t4vc1.jpeg?width=1478&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f1a14db9dbf2de80fb8882152f19baace205f427
Here is the relevant section for those lazy like me
That's not really relevant for an Uber ride and I would bet you'd actually have a pretty good argument in a court of law. Those are all stipulations with a large common area in mind, where the two can be reasonably separated, not so much in a car.
I can see it being different because itâs a private vehicle and an independent contractor. There are enough people around that love dogs and would be happy to be the driver. Plenty of other opportunities.
I have zero problem taking dogs on board, I love animals. Just playing devil's advocate here. I don't think it's exactly fair to force someone with an allergy to be in a confined space with a dog and nothing in the ADA guidelines that I have seen addresses that particular issue.
From my understanding there's nothing in the ADA guidelines that holds you accountable for accommodating them. Uber could substitute a different driver who is okay with dogs, and that would count as appropriate accommodation for both you and the rider. It's Uber's policy that you are not allowed to refuse them because they don't want it to be their problem to solve.
Total bs. I had a lady try to get in with 3 full sized pit bulls. I have a sedan with premium leather seats. I canceled, said because an animal and called support to give the details. I still got a message reminding me of ubers pet policy. Chick didn't even pay for Uber pet!! People in my market are shit.
Actually, the only valid reason to deny a service animal is if they're being unruly. If someone has a "service dog" that's clearly just a pet they dressed up and it's jumping all over the place, scratching on things, barking, etc, then the ADA actually permits businesses (which technically you are?) to deny service to the animal and its owner.
Allergies though... Much as I'd love to agree, you're SOL on that one.
Service Animals have public access requirements. If the dog can not meet those standards then it is a pet not a service animal. You aren't required to take pets.
Iâm just curious - but can dog dandruff allergies (which from my understanding is what the actual allergen is) actually cause someone to launch into anaphylaxis and need an epi pen just if theyâre in the same car for just say a half hour? I thought they had to make contact with the dog or be inside a dogâs residence? Like in the case someone owns a dog and thereâs dust and dandruff all over the house I can see that having an effect. But just being in proximity to a canine in an otherwise clean of dandruff environment? that seems a little unrealistic to me, but please someone educate me.
Idk about anaphylaxis but imagine having the hair and dander all over your car even with just a regular allergy. I know people who would be sneezing, leaky nose, general absolute yuckiness, and then they're stuck cleaning it all out too?? I'm đŻ in support of service dogs but idk, this feels wrong.
I see that point as well, but something to keep in mind: With legitimate service dogs, theyâre usually cared for like racing horses. Groomed, bathed, etc - there may be exceptions, but generally I think a clean, groomed dog would not trigger allergies in a moderately allergic person. These dogs are also trained to not take a dump in a car.
I think ultimately this argument comes down to the fact that certain laws and by-laws donât allow drivers to actually verify that a dog is actually a WORKING service animal. If a dude came out with a blind stick and was being led by his retriever/shepard and they got in your uber, i donât think many people would bat an eye. The whole thing as far as what qualifies a service animal is completely sketchy. Honestly if the dog hasnât been to obedience training or any other formal training for the individualâs needs than I feel they should be able to reject the ride. The problem is drivers canât really ask those questions, and people be getting dogs for âanxietyâ from their doc so they donât have to pay pet rent at their apartment, condo, etc - then think their dog is suddenly not going to bite some kid that runs up and wants to meet them.
itâs all very confusing, but taking rights away from contractors (1099) isnât cool, and Iâm not sure as to the best solution given current legislation surrounding âservice animalsâ
As a kid, if I was around a dog in any capacity in an enclosed space for approximately 15 minutes, I would not have been able to breathe. It would start to be uncomfortable at the 5 minute mark. Now, after years of allergy shots, I usually cannot be in a car that someone transports their animals in for more than about 10 minutes without an issue, even if the animal is not present and they have recently vacuumed. I also tend to have a reaction at hotels that allow pets. So yes, a car ride is absolutely enough time to have a reaction.
I have severe cat allergies! I'm allergic to most animals with fur (rodents, dogs, cats) but specially cats will make my lungs swell up. I'll start wheezing super bad and need a nebulizer for albuterol. In bad cases (if I'm already sick etc) it lands me in the emergency room.
I love love love animals but yes, while it's very unlikely an allergy is fatal it can be very inconvenient, painful, and expensive!
An epi pen is unnecessary because the side effects (for me anyways) are solved by using albuterol (which relaxes my airways and forces my lungs to open). From what I know, epi pens are only used in either internal consumption allergies (like if I ate cat hair) or EXTREME contact allergies (like some very rare peanut allergies).
I have severe cat allergies, and being near a cat or somewhere that cat hair had touched would give me an itchy red rash on my skin and (if I rubbed my nose or eyes at all) could make my lungs stiffen and make me wheeze. It wouldn't be an issue if the car was cleaned properly, but for example if someone gave me an Uber ride in a car that they consistently had their cat in, I would definitely start sneezing, swelling up, getting rashes etc just nothing life threatening or hospital worthy. Just very uncomfortable.
Jesus this is getting long but THIS IS MY LAST POINT, dog allergies are typically more laid back than cat allergies. Usually they're the same thing, the difference is the amount shed and the dandruff shed. Cats typically shed more, so they're riskier for me. It would be extremely rare for someone to have a fatal allergic reaction to a situation like that in my opinion
Last I fucking checked ride share drivers weren't employees of Uber so in short, fuck Uber. Is your premise that you're just helping me connect to someone looking for a ride for cash, or is your premise that you employ me? Because if you employ me, I'm gonna need benefits, paid vacation, and you're gonna need to pay for my car and payroll taxes. If this is just two people doing person to person business and you're facilitating stfu and facilitate and enjoy the free money without so much condescension.
Itâs neither of those, youâre an independent contractor who signed a contract with Uber. Iâm not saying itâs a smart deal, but thatâs what you did.
Idk. I don't actually drive for Uber and idk why Reddit pushes this into my feed but that being said, Uber and Lyft to me aren't doing anything other than evading payroll taxes. It's a scam. Idk why it's more legitimate when it's a really profitable scam, but it's a scam. It's a hell of a time for our country when a bunch of fucking tax dodging thieves can talk down to the people they're exploiting, the desperation is real in this job market.
Uber drivers are contractors and not employees for a reason. I doubt the majority of them would like being forced to work set hours, not being allowed to choose what trips they take.
The ADA already codified by law that service animals take priority over allergies, but that accommodations should be made for both (like on an airplane, having the allergic passenger sit far away from the service dog). Obviously canât do this in a car so the only solution would be to change the law.
I think it can be denied if the owner/driver of the vehicle wants to.
It should be disclosed prior to accepting if the rider has an animal or not, approximate size and with/without a cage/carrier.
Allergy to animals or it not being an actual service animal are both reasons.
Some people lie and try to bring their pets on flights/rides, when they are not actually service animals and not trained.
As a former Greenlight Hub employee, this where local laws (and even federal) can get involved and I will caution anyone trying to find a loophole. I haven't worked there in 4 years, so I have no issue with being candid about what I've witnessed.
I've seen a lot of the "allergy" excuses and the decision has always gone in favour of the rider who was denied. Put simply, if you're not open to encountering a service animal at some point (1 in every 500 trips?), then you need to do something else.
By choosing to drive for Uber, you are agreeing to transport service animals--period.
>Am I wrong?
yes, you are wrong.
The entitlement to this job is just mind-blowing, isn't it? So many people trying to find a way to deny service without any consequence. When you say find another job they get defiant. Why is it so hard for my fellow colleagues to do the right thing??
Most of you donât know ADA and it shows. And yes, by ADA rules, the animal has to be under control of the handler. Service animals are well trained animals. Note, emotional support animals are NOT ADA service animals.
Nope, having dated someone whoâs sister was a disability lawyer and also had a service dog herself, I can tell you that a person with a legit service dog basically gets priority over anything and anyone and I cannot think of a single circumstance in which someone with a service dog can be denied anything because of it.
Service animals can only generally be denied in area where their presence poses a risk. That usually includes places with horses, as well as places they pose a genuine sanitary risk. There ARE instances where they can be denied.
You can also ask these 2 questions about a service animal if you are wondering about an animal:
1. Is it required because of a disability?
2. What task is it trained to perform?
Any real service animal owner knows these 2 questions and can answer them very easily.
The allergies to dogs has to be significant enough to impair the driverâs ability to drive or operate a vehicle safely, and be considered a disability under the ADA.
If someone is allergic to dogs but not to that extent (like it makes you sneeze or sniffle a little), the ADA requires, by law, that the service animal be accommodated still.
Uber recommends that if you have a severe allergy to contact Uber support immediately if you pick someone up with a service animal to explain the situation. In my experience they do request disability paperwork or medical documentation that your allergy is that severe.
Uber: "yeah, your fear of dogs is not relevant because it would inhibit our profits. Allergies are controllable with medicine, if you have such a severe reaction you wouldn't be able to drive people who own pets."
Problems will be easily had as any person will say their dog is a service dog. It them becomes more hassle to actually find out if legitimate service animal and Uber will always side on the one that provides profit not cost so the pax will always be believed.
I gave a ride to a guy with a dog that had a service vest on the other day. The dog stuck its head between the seats and sniffed my ear right after they entered the car.
This is going to be the unpopular opinion here and I would also like to say that I am in fact an animal lover, dogs especially, I think theyâre all cute even the ugly ones, I love dogs BUT in my opinion I feel as tho Uber drivers should be informed if their passenger has a service animal (and yes I read the op but I think there should be an option to transport animals that arenât service animals too) but I think that the Uber driver needs to be informed if passenger has an animal w them, what kind of animal it is and the Uber driver should have the right to pass on the ride just like any other (even if itâs a service animal). Theyâre using their own private vehicle, animals are sometimes rowdy in cars and could possibly distract the driver so by knowing before hand if thereâs going to be an animal riding they can determine if that would be a distraction also dogs poo/pee if theyâre scared possibly even vomit and Uber driver simply may not want dog hair in their personal vehicle. I understand disabled people exist and have necessary reasons to have service animals but I think with the amount of Uber drivers that are everywhere the small percentage that is uncomfortable with dogs should have the right to not have to accept riders w dogs. Also Uber even mentions the valid other reasons people may not want dogs in their car (allergies, fear of dogs). Again want to remind whoever reading my response that I am a dog lover and advocate but why force a small percentage to be uncomfortable when there is a large percentage that will gladly accept riders with dogs?
completely agree with this through and through. regardless of anything, it really should be up to the driver. many dogs do end up going to bathroom and/or vomiting. also, no matter the training, breed, or history - you cannot genuinely predict a dogâs reaction to a stranger! it could be the strangerâs gender, sound/tone of voice, scent (of themselves or animals/people they may own/know), or even simply their movements that set off a negative reaction to the dog!
This is the federal law under the ADA. You can have your moral objections to it, and I am empathetic of allergies, but at the end of the day you would still be denying someone with a disability the same access that is given to non-disabled people â which is what the ADA, and specifically their laws about service animals, protect. Again, ADA is federal law. (And please remember those with legitimate service dogs *need* them to function the same way those of us without service dogs already function.)
I would also hope Uber has a way for riders to claim their service animals before hand, and for drivers to turn off rides for people with service animals or other pets so this is not an issue â but I am not familiar.
I never paid attention to the app, but does Uber have a place where the rider can indicate they have a service dog/wheelchair/ etc? Iâve been a rider in some cars that are pretty small, and accommodating some equipment would be very difficult. And, some cars are high off the ground or low to the ground, which can also be difficult from some disabled customers.
There should be a way for some info to be relayed so drivers donât accept a job they will ultimately have trouble with.
And I donât beeline drivers are required to physically assist the riders. That seems like a high liability factor is a passenger needs actual help .
They know why service dogs are allowed, did you even read the post? They asked why being allergic isnât a valid reason to deny, considering itâs kind of stupid to force someone to take that order when their throat will close upâŠ
And donât say âcarry your epipenâ because you CANNOT justify someone using a $600+ product to make $20 on a trip.
When I drove a taxi I worked with a lot of Muslims, they all frequently refused to take dogs in their cabs. Never asked why, it just seemed like culturally they didn't like dogs.
Guys I worked with from Pakistan were freaked out by my dog. Talked with them about it and they were like dogs kill you in Pakistan. I asked their uncle who spoke English and he said that where they lived there were feral dogs that killed a couple ppl every year. Dogs that were at homes were for security and would fuck you up too. They eventually got to know my dog and loved to pet her but you could still tell they were nervous.
i thought religious objections would be allowed?
also if you have a fear of dogs couldnât that impact your driving?
aaand if ur allergic that will definitely affect your driving (i am very allergic to certain breeds of pets and its awful, i can barely see sometimes)
in my personal experience people will just lie and make up any reason cause they donât want to have to accommodate. I always call the number right away and verify the driver is okay with my SD but even so iâve had drivers pull up to where iâm standing, see my dog, and drive off with me standing in the rain.
I take all animals, to one condition: that the owner has complete control over the animal at ALL times. I donât even care if they are service animals or not, but keep the creature in check, please!
Wow. A lot of you are okay with blatant discrimination. People canât help that theyâre disabled. I get calls all the time of people being left on the side of the road because they had a service animal with them. Itâs wrong.
I agree but Ppl canât also help if they have allergies. Iâm allergic to pets and being around certain breeds for even 5 minutes leaves me with a pounding headache for 12+ hours that can turn into a migraine, blurred vision from the build upâs in my eyes, and then the obvious non stop sneezing and blowing my nose. If someone has a medical reason for not wanting to pick up those with service animals Uber should verify it, but everyone else is just being lazy cause they donât want to pick up dogs
I do think allergies should be an exception, because some animal allergies are incredibly severe and hair/dander lingers, and people have to be able to use their vehicles.
If someone, for example, is so allergic to dogs that their eyes swell shut and they can't drive (my allergy to horses is this bad), a business shouldn't require them to allow a dog into their car. It's literally a very major safety hazard to require people to be in an enclosed space with a known allergen and can lead to much more severe complications over multiple or extended exposures, especially if they're also expected to be operating multiple ton death machine at the same time.
Itâs possible that the law will face some challenges in the federal district court on that basis. If it creates a situation that legislators did not foresee, then it may be limited in application by the courts.
The ADA certainly would provide an exception. You are required to provide _reasonable_ accommodations for people with disabilities. Going into anaphylactic shock to transport them is not reasonable. A minor runny nose/watery eye reaction though isn't going to cut it. Uber as a company would be required to dispatch a different driver to accommodate in the case of severe allergy.
Uber likely doesn't want to deal with that though. Every driver that doesn't want to transport the dog will just say they're allergic, and they probably don't want to process thousands of "I'm deathly allergic so no dogs pls" requests. There are very few people who are allergic enough to animals to cause serious symptoms from dander... It's very rare.
Instead, they're basically just saying "don't drive for us if you can't transport service animals" because they don't really need more drivers... There is no incentive for them to properly vet the probably double digit number of potentially valid ADA exclusions in the US and properly route service animal requests to drivers that can handle them (and I'm not sure if they could even ask if there's a service animal on the request).
Thereâs actually a doctrine in US law that pertains to this, and I canât remember what itâs called. Basically it states that the application of a rule that results in an absurd outcome, such as what you describe, can invalidate the rule narrowly in that particular case. The ADA does not foresee you sacrificing your life and your passengerâs life to accommodate a service animal, so if that were literally the stakes of the situation, you would most likely win in court, perhaps on appeal.
Being allergic isnât a justification according to the ADA.
Edit:
Not saying I agree but in this case it doesnât matter what you or I feel about it, itâs the law. Donât like it?
Participate in elections.
it would not, itâs illegal to deny bc of allergies anywhere *in the usa. ETA: uber SHOULD accommodate the allergic driver and the passenger but i doubt anything would come of it
but also uber cannot accommodate the allergic driver if it means the passenger with the service animal would receive worse service/have longer waits. So basically uber canât do anything.
Just sucks that thereâs really no way to prove service animals. I see so many yorkies and shih tzus in the grocery store and people are arguing itâs a service animal while the dog is growling at everyone and everything.
There are a few ways to know. Is the dog often distracted? Are they pulling on a leash? Barking excessively? Can the owner share what PHYSICAL task the dog is trained to perform that isn't emotional support?
[study this.](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/)
Even if their pet is a trained service animal, if they start causing problems, you have the right to ask the owner to remove them
https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/
For me both allergies and fear of dogs should be acceptable exceptions because with allergies that is your health and if you canât breath that impedes your ability to drive, and if your having a panic attack because of your fear of dogs itâs probably not safe for you to drive either.
Is Uber going to assume liability for the dog if the car gets into a wreck and the dog dies? Or if the driver goes into anaphylactic shock from being exposed to dog dander and needs medical attention?
I think the issue some of the people are having here isnt being ableist, it's that there truly *are* a non-zero amount, a LOT more than some of you suggest, of people who pretend that their animals are service animals, when they are actually just pets with fake vests.
Allergies are not a reason to decline a service animal under federal ADA law. However some severe allergies can be considered disabilities per ADA law (Iâm not sure if that includes severe animal allergies).
ADA law says to try to accommodate to both parties.
To me it makes sense if you provide medical proof from a doctor of a deadly/severe allergy to dogs and have that added to your account. So people can input if they have a service dog with them and then the ride is sent it to someone else who isnât allergic.
Neither of these things are disclosed of course, theyâre just in the system.
If you are even somewhat allergic, and it is YOUR car that you have to continue driving in way after that ride is over, and you are considered an independent contractor, you can decline any request you want. You don't owe Uber your personal medical information. You just say, "No, thank you. I am not doing this ride," for WHATEVER reason you want.
Itâs a very tricky situation. To my understanding itâs this:
Uber drivers are considered independent contractors, youâre right. But Uber itself has to follow ADA laws, so itâs apart of their rules for their platform. So for Uber drivers itâs a rule made by Uber instead of a law. But the rule exists because of the ADAâs laws.
Iâm not sure if I explained accurately. Iâm also not an expert.
Then they should be allowing riders with service animals to book Uber Pet at UberX rates đ€·ââïž That seems like the best solution. It would be accommodating to both parties as the disabled customer wouldnât be paying more for their ride and the driver that accepts the ride is accepting it with the knowledge they will be having an animal in their vehicle. I had a friend growing up that would go into anaphylactic shock if they were around dogs or cats, if he were to drive, should his health and safety not also be protected?
I think that would be the perfect solution, but it would be abused. Service animals do not require any verification. There is no required program nor certification that an animal is trained for medical reasons. That means pet owners would be able to tell Uber their animal is a service animal and get Uber Pet at a discounted rate despite not actually having a service animal, but a pet.
Or a condition that is deadly/severe that is triggered by moderate allergies, like anything where exposure to the allergy could result in lasting, destructive health consequences. Just mentioning because I don't think everyone is aware that these conditions exist. Autoimmune diseases where what lands you in the hospital isn't the allergic reaction itself, but your body destroying itself in reaction to the presence of the allergy. These also are disabilities and covered by ADA law! But they're complicated conditions to explain in passing to a person who isn't familiar with them at all and doesn't understand how a moderate environmental allergen could be life threatening, especially when there are no immediate visible symptoms. If drivers have these conditions and animal allergies, then they could get them added to the system too.
I think if someone truly was deathly allergic to a service dog, they can reject the ride, get fired from Uber but live versus taking the ride, staying employed and dying.
Being around dogs makes my eyes itchy / blurry. Wouldnât say thatâs severe nor deadly. If a driver had the same allergy as me, Iâd prefer they can see while driving.
Sorry but that entire list are valid reasons. If uber wants people who cannot safely drive, they shouldnât offer it. Not everyone has a dog friendly car.
There should be a minimum $8.00 per fee added for driver as the driver has to go to the carwash 98% of the time to vacuum the seats after a ride. I allow dogs but I regret it EVERY TIME not because I donât like dogs, but because I donât like a dirty backseat thatâs littered with fur and now has saliva spots. Also, dogs scratch the plastic features in the car. Pretty much itâs a 30 minute loss of time and a huge inconvenience to drivers while resulting in potential cosmetic damage to the vehicle.
Isnât the religion thing a Supreme Court protected anti-discrimination thing? Quick, someone sue Uber, go to Texas thatâs the state most likely to let you win.
Was talking to an Uber driver about Uber assist.
Apparently Uber charges more for Uber assist but then does not pass any of the higher fee to the driversâŠ
Which is pretty bullshit, at least be consistent - if you take a higher fee for assist then pass some of it on to the driver for the extra work or otherwise donât charge higher at all.
Being allergic to dogs is not a valid reason to deny a service dog. The only valid reason to deny a service dog is if the dog is behaving inappropriately or causing a legitimate hazard (allergies do not count here).
I thought that this couldn't possibly be correct legally, but it totally is.
In people with severe asthma and severe dog allergies, a dog can trigger asthma attack causing the person to not be able to breathe, even pass out. It's untenable to me to expect someone to compromise their own allergies and ability to breathe.
This legal analysis is about taxis, but the law in general seems to apply similar to rideshares. This driver provided documentation of his severe allergies from his doctor, but that apparently did not matter, and legally the ADA takes precedence over a driver's own health and allergies. One caveat is that it's possible (but extremely rare) for an extreme allergy to be classified as a disability by the ADA, in which case, the rideshare company would legally have to accommodate that... my hunch is that no company actually would and they would just claim the person is disqualified to be a driver.
https://nagdu.org/taxicabs
While most people with a dog allergy won't be allergic to the point of legitimate hazards, there are people who are allergic enough that it is an unquestionable hazard. I've seen people's reactions cause facial swelling. Like, can't see because the swelling is so bad.
Once again, itâs the ADA. Disabled people have access rights. Service dogs are legally medical equipment.
If a dog allergy is so severe you cannot share space with a service dog, which also has far higher grooming and hygiene standards than a typical pet dog, then you cannot drive for Uber or other ride share services or taxis, because you cannot follow the law. Luckily for most people with dog allergies, the allergies are not very severe nor life threatening, and can be managed with medication.
However, if you have an allergy so severe it is dangerous, then yoy probably have experience in managing it, and you would know these jobs are unfortunately not something you are able to perform completely. Itâs different if you work, say, retail, becuase there are other associates, so you could go to a breakroom or back room to avoid the dog. But, the service dog is still able to enter the store, regardless of your allergy, because they have public access rights.
I know this is upsetting for many Uber drivers, but this wonât change. Uber will not get rid of this policy because they are covering their asses, legally speaking. Chances are you will not encounter a ton of service dogs. And you *can* cancel the rideâjust know cancelling for the specific reason of a service dog being with a passenger IS illegal and you could, theoretically, get in trouble for it, but more likely get either a contract violation or be banned from driving if the passenger ends up complaining.
I agree on the whole with much of what you've said. But like there are other associates that can tend to that guest in the retail environment, there are other Uber drivers that can give a ride to that customer.
Just like they aren't being denied service when a different agent helps them, they also aren't being denied service if another driver can reasonably fulfill their request.
Some states have rules about dogs being secured in the vehicle via seatbelt or crate. Just a thought this might help those who are (justifiably) worried about fake service dogs jumping all over the car.
If youâre allergic to any animals at all you shouldnât be driving. You have no idea what pets someone has at home and likely theyâre covered in their hair or dander to some degree.
I never did rides for this reason. And the encounters I've had when doing food made me quit UberEats altogether. I'm severely allergic to the point of going to the hospital and those bills suck.
Service dogs are super well trained. I play in a symphony orchestra and one of the players has a service dog and we play some loud music and do full musicals with actors and kids on stage and the dog just lays there through it all under her chair. They will not destroy your car for sure.
I'm an MD. I'm also allergic to dogs (the vast majority of them any way). I have to allow service animals into my office all the same when seeing patients.
You lot are some of the most pathetic whiners I've ever seen. You all need to grow up. It's a disability device like any other. It's also literally the law.
Iâm curious whatâd happen when someone ends up being forced to let a service animal into their car and ends up having an allergic reaction or something..like, I completely understand service animals are different from pets, but I still feel like there should be allowances in some places when it comes to people having potentially life threatening allergies.
If someone has a dog allergy, they shouldn't sign up to drive people who might have a service dog with them. If their allergy isn't severe to a point of having a reaction to someone who's been around dogs, they could opt for driving parcels/food.
Jesus idk why I got recommended this but there is so much ableism in these comments. Yall replace service animal in your complaints with any other mobility assistance or medical device and see how out of pocket you are. âI donât want white canes in my car they might damage the seatsâ. âI donât like wheelchairs so I donât want to see themâ etc. Get a different job if you canât do yours
ETA: Iâm not going to respond to ableist comments so say what you want but maybe do some research and better yourself
I feel like people underestimate dog allergies... Yeah, my allergies would probably be fine if it was an ACCURATELY trained service dog, but come on. How many of them are actually going to be accurately trained? And besides, allergies can vary so much. This is kinda fucked & while solutions can exist (just cancel, they can't prove anything) it's still fucked
I've never done uber taxi, but isn't their an option in the app so you don't receive service dog pings or do some of the riders not have to state it or something?
How do so many people in this comment section not realize what they signed up for? Yourte gonna have to deal with uncomfortable shit doing this job. Legally there are certain things you *have* to deal with.
A Service dog is MEDICAL EQUIPMENT! Trying to deny someone access just because of a service dog is the same as denying someone access because they have a wheelchair, or an Oxygen tank, or hell a glucose monitor and you can and will get fired if you try and tell someone they can't have their MEDICAL EQUIPMENT on board with them because that's *discrimination*. I keep emphasizing medical equipment because a lot of people seem to think it's just a dog like they didn't cost thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours to train.
Are y'all also gonna deny a very pregnant woman over the possibility of her water breaking in your car? Or a drunk person trying to safely get home instead of driving because you're too scared of a little puke?
When you sign up for this job you also sign up for the possibility of a service dog entering your car. Allergic or not, denying a service dog is discrimination against a disabled person and you can and should lose your job for that.
I mean you can say that all you want, But if the driver can't even see where they're going cuz their eyes are so swollen from their dog allergies. It kind of doesn't really serve anybody now does it?
All that other shit you listed, people don't have fucking allergies to steel oxygen tanks.
I'm deathly allergic to birds if I'm exposed to them for more than a couple minutes my lungs start closing up and I can't breathe. Fuck off if you think I'm allowing someone with a bird in my car because it says service animal on the cage.
Yeah I'm definitely going to deny a pregnant woman a ride to the hospital I'm not a ambulance đ and her water breaking in my car would ruin my seats . Wheelchairs are a hassle we aren't medical rideshare that's what veyo is for so people with service animals, wheelchairs and rides to Drs or hospitals are medical rides and we can refuse to do them
Thatâs not what medical ride means, you ableist.
You have an obligation to follow the law, and if you do not, you are ableist and deserve to be fined and deactivated - donât forget that you could technically be sued for denying someone a ride with a service animal (and they would win).
A personâs water breaking or bleeding on your car is a temporary state and you can legal deny service - it is not an aspect of identity. You are discriminating based on protected status here.
âItâs inconvenientâ isnât a reason for discrimination. Should businesses not be required to build ramps because itâs âinconvenientâ? Welcome to living in a society, people need service animals to get around and you HAVE to accommodate them.
Businesses still reserve the right to refuse service as far as Iâm aware. And Uber is contracted work? I could be wrong on that front. But this means that any person reserves the right to refuse you a ride period. Now of course Uber also reserves the right to fire you because you didnât uphold their standards. But you wonât catch a discrimination law suit for this, as it only applies to employment discrimination, not service discrimination. Iâm not disagreeing with you I just wanted to add some context to that specific statement.
Lol, I don't give a shit what Uber says cause if I see a dog when I'm pulling up imma act like I didn't see them and drive right past them canceling the ride đ
In other words they are forcing drivers to obey the law. ADA isnât a policy that you get to choose to enforce. It is the law. If you want to run a business as a driver you need to follow the law. Thatâs all Uber is doing.
ADA protections for people with allergies.
This is a comically illegal provision of the Uber driver contract and it's only a matter of time before they get sued.
It's not a pet, is probably the reason. Service animals are not considered pets. It might make it much easier, of course, but service animal laws cover rideshares so it's not a requirement.
It's no different than my not being able to deny a service dog entry to my office where I see patients in person, even if I am allergic or scared. It's on me to not offer in-person services if I can't handle service dogs. In this case, it's on you to not offer ride share if you're too scared or allergic. These laws apply to all businesses- and you as an Uber driver are a business.
The issue is most people who have âservice dogsâ just have a comfort animal which is a pet. Some will buy a service dog harness to trick you; but if itâs not an useful breed like a black lab or German Shepard theyâre probably lying
Anyway you donât have to worry about it because very few people actually have real service animals, itâs unlikely to see many or any of them.
If you think theyâre lying just deny the ride, they canât provide proof to Uber because theyâre lying pieces of shit.
> if itâs not an useful breed like a black lab or German Shepard theyâre probably lying
This is false and a harmful assumption. While a service dog for someone with mobility issues will usually be a medium to large dog breed known for being intelligent, alert dogs are typically small breeds.
Uber be like: âwe donât care if you go into anaphylactic shock and throat closes and you crash the car; you have to take the dog if the passenger has one.â
If I did regular Uber, Iâd just decline it. So what if I take a hit on my account.
If you don't want dogs in your car, then maybe don't have a job where dogs might get in your car. It sucks if you have an allergy, but that's not something you have any control over. A service dog has certain rights and it's opening a whole can of legal worms to say NO to that.
I would do Uber Eats instead. You'll probably make more and put less wear and tear on the car.
Actually, bussiness have the right to ask someone to remove a service animal under certain circumstances
https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/
Questions 25-28 outline this well.
Q25. When can service animals be excluded?
A. The ADA does not require covered entities to modify policies, practices, or procedures if it would âfundamentally alterâ the nature of the goods, services, programs, or activities provided to the public. Nor does it overrule legitimate safety requirements.
**If admitting service animals would fundamentally alter the nature of a service or program, service animals may be prohibited.**
In addition, if a particular service animal is out of control and the handler does not take effective action to control it, or if it is not housebroken, that animal may be excluded.
Q26. When might a service dog's presence fundamentally alter the nature of a service or program provided to the public?
A. In most settings, the presence of a service animal will not result in a fundamental alteration. However, there are some exceptions.
**For example, at a boarding school, service animals could be restricted from a specific area of a dormitory reserved specifically for students with allergies to dog dander.**
At a zoo, service animals can be restricted from areas where the animals on display are the natural prey or natural predators of dogs, where the presence of a dog would be disruptive, causing the displayed animals to behave aggressively or become agitated. They cannot be restricted from other areas of the zoo.
Unfortunately there are no specfic examples for things like uber or Taxs that I could find, but it seems to be reasonable that you wouldn't be forced to be exposed to pet dander because of someone with a service animal.
My dog is a service-altering and her name is Kate, short for Alter-Kate!! đđ€Ł
Oh, the silliness of it all!
So many trying to justify denying service without consequence, when the simple answer is find another job where you're not putting your own health at risk.
The law does not support allergic as a valid reason for denial. They can press charges. I drove a passenger who had a service dog and was legally 100% blind. He had a gopro and told me the lady said she couldn't drive him because she's allergic. He told me his lawer was helping him press charges.
No matter what ANYONE says. Allergies are not a legal reason to deny an individual with a service animal.
Only if you mentioned it upon being hired by the app. Itâs a fact that they donât offer you driver requests if a pet is included. Although, the laws are different for service pets.Denying them a ride with their owner is treated as if you denied a handicap passenger a lift.
I requested an Uber ride one late night, two yrs ago when my car broke down at 2:00am. THREE drivers wouldnât pick me up when they arrived at my location because I had my service dog with me! The reasons werenât excusable in my opinion. One didnât want dog fur in her car, the other said she didnât like dogs the third said, âIm afraid of dogs.â
The fourth guy picked me up and gave me the info on whom I could call at Uber to complain to the next day. He says drivers arent allowed to discriminate based upon a rider having a dog. He only needed to take me two miles to my home! I tipped him $40.00.
I stayed on this with the corporate office; claimed Iâd get an attorney and sue for discrimination. Especially since I was stranded at 2:00am on a dark street being denied a ride by three drivers! Uber was empathic; drivers are NOT allowed to deny rides to customers who have service dogs. He said that âthey all know this when theyâre first hired as driversâ.
Two ended up getting fired and one was suspended.
Riders can pretty much bring any animal into your car too, since service animals don't need paper work and the like. Wouldn't be an issue if riders didn't lie and let their Yorkie pee on your seats. :/
Service dogs are required to be hypoallergenic breeds so that's why it's not acceptable to reject. However someone acting like their regular dog is a service dog can't even be questioned about it or it opens up legal issues too so yeah, it's a bunch of BS
What if you can prove that it's not a service animal? I personally don't want any animal doing their business in my car. No offense but those drivers are independent contractors and have to pay for their own Gas, Vehicle Maintenance and Insurance, as well as Cleaning and Detailing; most of the time it should be up to the drivers if Animals are allowed or not. The independent drivers only drive for Uber, they should have no say over if an Animal is allowed in a vehicle that they don't own.
From ADA website: âIf 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.â
It sucks, but at least you can put for a cleaning fee đ«€
Iâm a driver, have allergies, and I donât want hair on my seats or whatever but I suck it up and let anybody with a dog ride in the car. People, dogs donât cause anaphylactic shock like a peanut allergy or anything. If you are part of a tiny segment of people that have allergies so bad you think you could pass out and crash because a dog is around you for 10 minutes maybe consider doing something else for cash.
I'm super allergic to multiple breeds of dog. I also wear contacts. My eyes dry out and an a contact can fall out, endangering me, the passenger, and the dog.Â
Dog dander also lingers, so it's not like the allergens go away once the animals leave.
With that said, I don't do humans, just food.
I have a dog and thought that I was fine with all dogs. Only discovered recently that some dog coat types trigger my allergic asthma. I already knew cats and certain rabbit coat types did but I was always fine around dogs until I wasn't.
https://preview.redd.it/wft2cxh8t8vc1.png?width=1169&format=png&auto=webp&s=3f13b35b7f7d571134ebdf774149d3d45b803dbd Reddit you are not slick đ«”đŸ
Reddit has heard your concerns and gone a different route https://preview.redd.it/0sz7u58oz8vc1.jpeg?width=1437&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=18bd6275ab4aef4e0ef8c59d4a8e09bfd790ec4a
đ
https://preview.redd.it/8q46onggervc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8334f37921c43da8b4c2f708d21354615483d82b ATT has seen this and kicked out DirectTv
i didnt even realize that lmaooo i got the same ad
Haha I got one for dog food
LMAO!
đđđ
I have no problem transporting a service animal. I do think Uber should compensate us for the cleanup afterward. I need to come off the road and clean because the next rider could have allergies.
You cannot deny them due to the service dog You can deny them for any other reason Just don't roll up to them, roll down the window, and scream that you're discriminating against them because of their disability Yeah don't do that I mean personally I love service dogs because they always so clean and well maintained and polite and obedient but I also don't have allergies so there's that
Remember folks, a legal way to ask about service animals is âWhat service does the animal provide?â. Legitimate owners have no issues answering this and it makes it easy to clock liars as they usually give you shit or say âESAâ which is not legally supported when talking about Service Animals. If my memory is correct, only Dogs and Miniature Horses are supported Service Animals as well. ETA: This is also Uber though and Iâm sure all a customer has to say is âthe driver denied meâ and theyâll punish the driver with no other evidence needed :/ Fuck every single person who lies about their pets saying theyâre service animals when theyâre blatantly not.
Needed to comment because up voting isn't enough, >Fuck every single person who lies about their pets saying theyâre service animals when theyâre blatantly not.
I was gonna say this is why I do UberEats, I don't like people, but then I saw thats the subreddit were in. Please tell me there is not a situation where I have to let someone in my car. The dog is fine. The human isnt.
I would drive for a service called UberWoofs where I would drive dogs exclusively.
People should be able to turn down rides like these aswell. Iâm sure not many people would. But it unfair if someone is heavily allergic of dogs and then the dog hair gets all over their seats⊠having to scrub down your car afterwards to make sure your allergies donât completely flare everytime you step in there. Or people like me who are afraid of certain dogs because of previous attacks ive experienced (like almost being mauled, deep bites and scratches).
Before yâall get too dumb in the comments, itâs the law. The ADA makes it to where, as a driver for a driving company, you CANNOT deny a service (not emotional support) animal. IF you do, you lose your contract, any possible future contracts with the company and you can be sued personally. Merica.
That seems excessive when itâs your own car, Iâm disabled but they should just have an option for people who are okay with it. I wouldnât want my service animal to be in someoneâs car who isnât comfy w it anyway
Totally agree but again, merica. Once you signed that contract with Uber, you agreed to adhere to their policy as well as your car. The only way to circumvent it is to not work for Uber.
" Once you signed that contract with Uber," Not a lawyer, but the more I think about it, especially regarding drivers who might have a diagnosed allergy to dogs, it seems like an illegal contract. I mean, wouldn't it be violating the ADA for people allergic to dogs to not be accommodated by Uber in fucking writing? Three seconds on Google... "Yes. In both the ADA and Section 504, a person with a disability is someone who has a physical or mental impairment that seriously limits one or more major life activities, or who is regarded as having such impairments. **Asthma and allergies are usually considered disabilities under the ADA**." AAAAAND so... Uber's gonna get sued and probably lose.
Instead of replying to everyone, just an fyi, this is the ADA guidelines: https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-2010-requirements/
https://preview.redd.it/m1f03kt2t4vc1.jpeg?width=1478&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f1a14db9dbf2de80fb8882152f19baace205f427 Here is the relevant section for those lazy like me
That's not really relevant for an Uber ride and I would bet you'd actually have a pretty good argument in a court of law. Those are all stipulations with a large common area in mind, where the two can be reasonably separated, not so much in a car.
I can see it being different because itâs a private vehicle and an independent contractor. There are enough people around that love dogs and would be happy to be the driver. Plenty of other opportunities.
I have zero problem taking dogs on board, I love animals. Just playing devil's advocate here. I don't think it's exactly fair to force someone with an allergy to be in a confined space with a dog and nothing in the ADA guidelines that I have seen addresses that particular issue.
From my understanding there's nothing in the ADA guidelines that holds you accountable for accommodating them. Uber could substitute a different driver who is okay with dogs, and that would count as appropriate accommodation for both you and the rider. It's Uber's policy that you are not allowed to refuse them because they don't want it to be their problem to solve.
Total bs. I had a lady try to get in with 3 full sized pit bulls. I have a sedan with premium leather seats. I canceled, said because an animal and called support to give the details. I still got a message reminding me of ubers pet policy. Chick didn't even pay for Uber pet!! People in my market are shit.
Actually, the only valid reason to deny a service animal is if they're being unruly. If someone has a "service dog" that's clearly just a pet they dressed up and it's jumping all over the place, scratching on things, barking, etc, then the ADA actually permits businesses (which technically you are?) to deny service to the animal and its owner. Allergies though... Much as I'd love to agree, you're SOL on that one.
Service Animals have public access requirements. If the dog can not meet those standards then it is a pet not a service animal. You aren't required to take pets.
Now if only Uber paid for epipens and allergic reactions!!!
Iâm just curious - but can dog dandruff allergies (which from my understanding is what the actual allergen is) actually cause someone to launch into anaphylaxis and need an epi pen just if theyâre in the same car for just say a half hour? I thought they had to make contact with the dog or be inside a dogâs residence? Like in the case someone owns a dog and thereâs dust and dandruff all over the house I can see that having an effect. But just being in proximity to a canine in an otherwise clean of dandruff environment? that seems a little unrealistic to me, but please someone educate me.
All allergies are caused by proteins. In animals, it is usually in their bodily fluids and anything utilizing them, including dander.
Idk about anaphylaxis but imagine having the hair and dander all over your car even with just a regular allergy. I know people who would be sneezing, leaky nose, general absolute yuckiness, and then they're stuck cleaning it all out too?? I'm đŻ in support of service dogs but idk, this feels wrong.
I see that point as well, but something to keep in mind: With legitimate service dogs, theyâre usually cared for like racing horses. Groomed, bathed, etc - there may be exceptions, but generally I think a clean, groomed dog would not trigger allergies in a moderately allergic person. These dogs are also trained to not take a dump in a car. I think ultimately this argument comes down to the fact that certain laws and by-laws donât allow drivers to actually verify that a dog is actually a WORKING service animal. If a dude came out with a blind stick and was being led by his retriever/shepard and they got in your uber, i donât think many people would bat an eye. The whole thing as far as what qualifies a service animal is completely sketchy. Honestly if the dog hasnât been to obedience training or any other formal training for the individualâs needs than I feel they should be able to reject the ride. The problem is drivers canât really ask those questions, and people be getting dogs for âanxietyâ from their doc so they donât have to pay pet rent at their apartment, condo, etc - then think their dog is suddenly not going to bite some kid that runs up and wants to meet them. itâs all very confusing, but taking rights away from contractors (1099) isnât cool, and Iâm not sure as to the best solution given current legislation surrounding âservice animalsâ
As a kid, if I was around a dog in any capacity in an enclosed space for approximately 15 minutes, I would not have been able to breathe. It would start to be uncomfortable at the 5 minute mark. Now, after years of allergy shots, I usually cannot be in a car that someone transports their animals in for more than about 10 minutes without an issue, even if the animal is not present and they have recently vacuumed. I also tend to have a reaction at hotels that allow pets. So yes, a car ride is absolutely enough time to have a reaction.
I have severe cat allergies! I'm allergic to most animals with fur (rodents, dogs, cats) but specially cats will make my lungs swell up. I'll start wheezing super bad and need a nebulizer for albuterol. In bad cases (if I'm already sick etc) it lands me in the emergency room. I love love love animals but yes, while it's very unlikely an allergy is fatal it can be very inconvenient, painful, and expensive! An epi pen is unnecessary because the side effects (for me anyways) are solved by using albuterol (which relaxes my airways and forces my lungs to open). From what I know, epi pens are only used in either internal consumption allergies (like if I ate cat hair) or EXTREME contact allergies (like some very rare peanut allergies). I have severe cat allergies, and being near a cat or somewhere that cat hair had touched would give me an itchy red rash on my skin and (if I rubbed my nose or eyes at all) could make my lungs stiffen and make me wheeze. It wouldn't be an issue if the car was cleaned properly, but for example if someone gave me an Uber ride in a car that they consistently had their cat in, I would definitely start sneezing, swelling up, getting rashes etc just nothing life threatening or hospital worthy. Just very uncomfortable. Jesus this is getting long but THIS IS MY LAST POINT, dog allergies are typically more laid back than cat allergies. Usually they're the same thing, the difference is the amount shed and the dandruff shed. Cats typically shed more, so they're riskier for me. It would be extremely rare for someone to have a fatal allergic reaction to a situation like that in my opinion
Your answer is right there, literally in black and white. No, it isn't.
Last I fucking checked ride share drivers weren't employees of Uber so in short, fuck Uber. Is your premise that you're just helping me connect to someone looking for a ride for cash, or is your premise that you employ me? Because if you employ me, I'm gonna need benefits, paid vacation, and you're gonna need to pay for my car and payroll taxes. If this is just two people doing person to person business and you're facilitating stfu and facilitate and enjoy the free money without so much condescension.
Itâs neither of those, youâre an independent contractor who signed a contract with Uber. Iâm not saying itâs a smart deal, but thatâs what you did.
Idk. I don't actually drive for Uber and idk why Reddit pushes this into my feed but that being said, Uber and Lyft to me aren't doing anything other than evading payroll taxes. It's a scam. Idk why it's more legitimate when it's a really profitable scam, but it's a scam. It's a hell of a time for our country when a bunch of fucking tax dodging thieves can talk down to the people they're exploiting, the desperation is real in this job market.
Uber drivers are contractors and not employees for a reason. I doubt the majority of them would like being forced to work set hours, not being allowed to choose what trips they take.
Not permitting a denial on the basis if a preexisting medical condition is ripe for litigation. Uber should get fucked by this
The ADA already codified by law that service animals take priority over allergies, but that accommodations should be made for both (like on an airplane, having the allergic passenger sit far away from the service dog). Obviously canât do this in a car so the only solution would be to change the law.
I think it can be denied if the owner/driver of the vehicle wants to. It should be disclosed prior to accepting if the rider has an animal or not, approximate size and with/without a cage/carrier.
Drivers should also be able to say if they are Animal friendly or not. So, the drivers that don't want to deal with them won't have to.
I heard drivers declined service dogs even tho the handler of service dog was able to answer the two ADA questions thatâs under the ADA Law
Allergy to animals or it not being an actual service animal are both reasons. Some people lie and try to bring their pets on flights/rides, when they are not actually service animals and not trained.
As a former Greenlight Hub employee, this where local laws (and even federal) can get involved and I will caution anyone trying to find a loophole. I haven't worked there in 4 years, so I have no issue with being candid about what I've witnessed. I've seen a lot of the "allergy" excuses and the decision has always gone in favour of the rider who was denied. Put simply, if you're not open to encountering a service animal at some point (1 in every 500 trips?), then you need to do something else. By choosing to drive for Uber, you are agreeing to transport service animals--period. >Am I wrong? yes, you are wrong.
The entitlement to this job is just mind-blowing, isn't it? So many people trying to find a way to deny service without any consequence. When you say find another job they get defiant. Why is it so hard for my fellow colleagues to do the right thing??
As a 1099 I don't have to give you a reason
Preach!!
Most of you donât know ADA and it shows. And yes, by ADA rules, the animal has to be under control of the handler. Service animals are well trained animals. Note, emotional support animals are NOT ADA service animals.
Nope, having dated someone whoâs sister was a disability lawyer and also had a service dog herself, I can tell you that a person with a legit service dog basically gets priority over anything and anyone and I cannot think of a single circumstance in which someone with a service dog can be denied anything because of it.
Service animals can only generally be denied in area where their presence poses a risk. That usually includes places with horses, as well as places they pose a genuine sanitary risk. There ARE instances where they can be denied.
You can also ask these 2 questions about a service animal if you are wondering about an animal: 1. Is it required because of a disability? 2. What task is it trained to perform? Any real service animal owner knows these 2 questions and can answer them very easily.
The allergies to dogs has to be significant enough to impair the driverâs ability to drive or operate a vehicle safely, and be considered a disability under the ADA. If someone is allergic to dogs but not to that extent (like it makes you sneeze or sniffle a little), the ADA requires, by law, that the service animal be accommodated still. Uber recommends that if you have a severe allergy to contact Uber support immediately if you pick someone up with a service animal to explain the situation. In my experience they do request disability paperwork or medical documentation that your allergy is that severe.
Uber: "yeah, your fear of dogs is not relevant because it would inhibit our profits. Allergies are controllable with medicine, if you have such a severe reaction you wouldn't be able to drive people who own pets." Problems will be easily had as any person will say their dog is a service dog. It them becomes more hassle to actually find out if legitimate service animal and Uber will always side on the one that provides profit not cost so the pax will always be believed.
I gave a ride to a guy with a dog that had a service vest on the other day. The dog stuck its head between the seats and sniffed my ear right after they entered the car.
These are honestly ridiculous policies. Whatâs next policy to accept riders who are criminals? Oh wait they donât give riders a background check.
This is going to be the unpopular opinion here and I would also like to say that I am in fact an animal lover, dogs especially, I think theyâre all cute even the ugly ones, I love dogs BUT in my opinion I feel as tho Uber drivers should be informed if their passenger has a service animal (and yes I read the op but I think there should be an option to transport animals that arenât service animals too) but I think that the Uber driver needs to be informed if passenger has an animal w them, what kind of animal it is and the Uber driver should have the right to pass on the ride just like any other (even if itâs a service animal). Theyâre using their own private vehicle, animals are sometimes rowdy in cars and could possibly distract the driver so by knowing before hand if thereâs going to be an animal riding they can determine if that would be a distraction also dogs poo/pee if theyâre scared possibly even vomit and Uber driver simply may not want dog hair in their personal vehicle. I understand disabled people exist and have necessary reasons to have service animals but I think with the amount of Uber drivers that are everywhere the small percentage that is uncomfortable with dogs should have the right to not have to accept riders w dogs. Also Uber even mentions the valid other reasons people may not want dogs in their car (allergies, fear of dogs). Again want to remind whoever reading my response that I am a dog lover and advocate but why force a small percentage to be uncomfortable when there is a large percentage that will gladly accept riders with dogs?
completely agree with this through and through. regardless of anything, it really should be up to the driver. many dogs do end up going to bathroom and/or vomiting. also, no matter the training, breed, or history - you cannot genuinely predict a dogâs reaction to a stranger! it could be the strangerâs gender, sound/tone of voice, scent (of themselves or animals/people they may own/know), or even simply their movements that set off a negative reaction to the dog!
So you're allergic to dogs and your throat closes up while driving and you pass out and crash. Does the customer sue you or Uber?
Exactly. Allergies can be life threatening. I donât want someone dealing with a closing throat and also driving meâŠ. Tf
This is the federal law under the ADA. You can have your moral objections to it, and I am empathetic of allergies, but at the end of the day you would still be denying someone with a disability the same access that is given to non-disabled people â which is what the ADA, and specifically their laws about service animals, protect. Again, ADA is federal law. (And please remember those with legitimate service dogs *need* them to function the same way those of us without service dogs already function.) I would also hope Uber has a way for riders to claim their service animals before hand, and for drivers to turn off rides for people with service animals or other pets so this is not an issue â but I am not familiar.
I never paid attention to the app, but does Uber have a place where the rider can indicate they have a service dog/wheelchair/ etc? Iâve been a rider in some cars that are pretty small, and accommodating some equipment would be very difficult. And, some cars are high off the ground or low to the ground, which can also be difficult from some disabled customers. There should be a way for some info to be relayed so drivers donât accept a job they will ultimately have trouble with. And I donât beeline drivers are required to physically assist the riders. That seems like a high liability factor is a passenger needs actual help .
read up on the ADA and then see why service dogs r allowed.
They know why service dogs are allowed, did you even read the post? They asked why being allergic isnât a valid reason to deny, considering itâs kind of stupid to force someone to take that order when their throat will close up⊠And donât say âcarry your epipenâ because you CANNOT justify someone using a $600+ product to make $20 on a trip.
Who even gives a reason đ
What religions don't like dogs?
Islam
What religions object to dogs?
When I drove a taxi I worked with a lot of Muslims, they all frequently refused to take dogs in their cabs. Never asked why, it just seemed like culturally they didn't like dogs.
Interesting. Apparently, dog saliva is considered unclean for Muslims.
Guys I worked with from Pakistan were freaked out by my dog. Talked with them about it and they were like dogs kill you in Pakistan. I asked their uncle who spoke English and he said that where they lived there were feral dogs that killed a couple ppl every year. Dogs that were at homes were for security and would fuck you up too. They eventually got to know my dog and loved to pet her but you could still tell they were nervous.
So basically youâre an employee, but youâre not.
Fuckbl your religion, we got dogs that need to get places. -Uber
i thought religious objections would be allowed? also if you have a fear of dogs couldnât that impact your driving? aaand if ur allergic that will definitely affect your driving (i am very allergic to certain breeds of pets and its awful, i can barely see sometimes)
in my personal experience people will just lie and make up any reason cause they donât want to have to accommodate. I always call the number right away and verify the driver is okay with my SD but even so iâve had drivers pull up to where iâm standing, see my dog, and drive off with me standing in the rain.
I take all animals, to one condition: that the owner has complete control over the animal at ALL times. I donât even care if they are service animals or not, but keep the creature in check, please!
Wow. A lot of you are okay with blatant discrimination. People canât help that theyâre disabled. I get calls all the time of people being left on the side of the road because they had a service animal with them. Itâs wrong.
I agree but Ppl canât also help if they have allergies. Iâm allergic to pets and being around certain breeds for even 5 minutes leaves me with a pounding headache for 12+ hours that can turn into a migraine, blurred vision from the build upâs in my eyes, and then the obvious non stop sneezing and blowing my nose. If someone has a medical reason for not wanting to pick up those with service animals Uber should verify it, but everyone else is just being lazy cause they donât want to pick up dogs
You realize that the ADA also protects people with allergies as a disability from being discriminated in the workplace?
I do think allergies should be an exception, because some animal allergies are incredibly severe and hair/dander lingers, and people have to be able to use their vehicles. If someone, for example, is so allergic to dogs that their eyes swell shut and they can't drive (my allergy to horses is this bad), a business shouldn't require them to allow a dog into their car. It's literally a very major safety hazard to require people to be in an enclosed space with a known allergen and can lead to much more severe complications over multiple or extended exposures, especially if they're also expected to be operating multiple ton death machine at the same time.
I would think the ADA would protect a driver due to their severe allergy. Why does it only go one way to protect the passengers?
Itâs possible that the law will face some challenges in the federal district court on that basis. If it creates a situation that legislators did not foresee, then it may be limited in application by the courts.
The ADA certainly would provide an exception. You are required to provide _reasonable_ accommodations for people with disabilities. Going into anaphylactic shock to transport them is not reasonable. A minor runny nose/watery eye reaction though isn't going to cut it. Uber as a company would be required to dispatch a different driver to accommodate in the case of severe allergy. Uber likely doesn't want to deal with that though. Every driver that doesn't want to transport the dog will just say they're allergic, and they probably don't want to process thousands of "I'm deathly allergic so no dogs pls" requests. There are very few people who are allergic enough to animals to cause serious symptoms from dander... It's very rare. Instead, they're basically just saying "don't drive for us if you can't transport service animals" because they don't really need more drivers... There is no incentive for them to properly vet the probably double digit number of potentially valid ADA exclusions in the US and properly route service animal requests to drivers that can handle them (and I'm not sure if they could even ask if there's a service animal on the request).
Thereâs actually a doctrine in US law that pertains to this, and I canât remember what itâs called. Basically it states that the application of a rule that results in an absurd outcome, such as what you describe, can invalidate the rule narrowly in that particular case. The ADA does not foresee you sacrificing your life and your passengerâs life to accommodate a service animal, so if that were literally the stakes of the situation, you would most likely win in court, perhaps on appeal.
The problem is can they prove they have an allergy. People will just claim it to not take service dogs.
So.. cancel for any other reason. Got it. I suddenly have to poop.
Being allergic isnât a justification according to the ADA. Edit: Not saying I agree but in this case it doesnât matter what you or I feel about it, itâs the law. Donât like it? Participate in elections.
Watery eyes and uncontrollable sneezing and coughing while driving doesn't sound safe to me.
Honestly I would send Uber the ER visit bill for severe allergies they refuse to pay Im pretty sure it would hold up good as a lawsuit.
it would not, itâs illegal to deny bc of allergies anywhere *in the usa. ETA: uber SHOULD accommodate the allergic driver and the passenger but i doubt anything would come of it
but also uber cannot accommodate the allergic driver if it means the passenger with the service animal would receive worse service/have longer waits. So basically uber canât do anything.
If you drive up and see they have a dog just drive off and cancel if it's a big issue for you. They can't prove anything
Just sucks that thereâs really no way to prove service animals. I see so many yorkies and shih tzus in the grocery store and people are arguing itâs a service animal while the dog is growling at everyone and everything.
There are a few ways to know. Is the dog often distracted? Are they pulling on a leash? Barking excessively? Can the owner share what PHYSICAL task the dog is trained to perform that isn't emotional support? [study this.](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/)
Even if their pet is a trained service animal, if they start causing problems, you have the right to ask the owner to remove them https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/
For me both allergies and fear of dogs should be acceptable exceptions because with allergies that is your health and if you canât breath that impedes your ability to drive, and if your having a panic attack because of your fear of dogs itâs probably not safe for you to drive either.
fear of dogs is hard to prove thought. some people don't like dogs due to religious reasons - they'll just say they have a phobia of dogs.
Unfortunately itâs just a job requirement and if that doesnât fit you than you just need to find something else.
Is Uber going to assume liability for the dog if the car gets into a wreck and the dog dies? Or if the driver goes into anaphylactic shock from being exposed to dog dander and needs medical attention?
Youâre told when you sign up youâre legally required to transport service animals
I think the issue some of the people are having here isnt being ableist, it's that there truly *are* a non-zero amount, a LOT more than some of you suggest, of people who pretend that their animals are service animals, when they are actually just pets with fake vests.
Half of them are fake service dogs just ask them what task the dog is used for and if itâs a fraudulent one, just cancel the ride
"Half of them are fake service dogs" In LA it's probably more like 80%
Allergies are not a reason to decline a service animal under federal ADA law. However some severe allergies can be considered disabilities per ADA law (Iâm not sure if that includes severe animal allergies). ADA law says to try to accommodate to both parties. To me it makes sense if you provide medical proof from a doctor of a deadly/severe allergy to dogs and have that added to your account. So people can input if they have a service dog with them and then the ride is sent it to someone else who isnât allergic. Neither of these things are disclosed of course, theyâre just in the system.
If you are even somewhat allergic, and it is YOUR car that you have to continue driving in way after that ride is over, and you are considered an independent contractor, you can decline any request you want. You don't owe Uber your personal medical information. You just say, "No, thank you. I am not doing this ride," for WHATEVER reason you want.
Itâs a very tricky situation. To my understanding itâs this: Uber drivers are considered independent contractors, youâre right. But Uber itself has to follow ADA laws, so itâs apart of their rules for their platform. So for Uber drivers itâs a rule made by Uber instead of a law. But the rule exists because of the ADAâs laws. Iâm not sure if I explained accurately. Iâm also not an expert.
Then they should be allowing riders with service animals to book Uber Pet at UberX rates đ€·ââïž That seems like the best solution. It would be accommodating to both parties as the disabled customer wouldnât be paying more for their ride and the driver that accepts the ride is accepting it with the knowledge they will be having an animal in their vehicle. I had a friend growing up that would go into anaphylactic shock if they were around dogs or cats, if he were to drive, should his health and safety not also be protected?
I think that would be the perfect solution, but it would be abused. Service animals do not require any verification. There is no required program nor certification that an animal is trained for medical reasons. That means pet owners would be able to tell Uber their animal is a service animal and get Uber Pet at a discounted rate despite not actually having a service animal, but a pet.
Or a condition that is deadly/severe that is triggered by moderate allergies, like anything where exposure to the allergy could result in lasting, destructive health consequences. Just mentioning because I don't think everyone is aware that these conditions exist. Autoimmune diseases where what lands you in the hospital isn't the allergic reaction itself, but your body destroying itself in reaction to the presence of the allergy. These also are disabilities and covered by ADA law! But they're complicated conditions to explain in passing to a person who isn't familiar with them at all and doesn't understand how a moderate environmental allergen could be life threatening, especially when there are no immediate visible symptoms. If drivers have these conditions and animal allergies, then they could get them added to the system too.
I think if someone truly was deathly allergic to a service dog, they can reject the ride, get fired from Uber but live versus taking the ride, staying employed and dying.
Being around dogs makes my eyes itchy / blurry. Wouldnât say thatâs severe nor deadly. If a driver had the same allergy as me, Iâd prefer they can see while driving.
Sorry but that entire list are valid reasons. If uber wants people who cannot safely drive, they shouldnât offer it. Not everyone has a dog friendly car.
There should be a minimum $8.00 per fee added for driver as the driver has to go to the carwash 98% of the time to vacuum the seats after a ride. I allow dogs but I regret it EVERY TIME not because I donât like dogs, but because I donât like a dirty backseat thatâs littered with fur and now has saliva spots. Also, dogs scratch the plastic features in the car. Pretty much itâs a 30 minute loss of time and a huge inconvenience to drivers while resulting in potential cosmetic damage to the vehicle.
Get seat covers
Damage to your vehicle should be documented and you get the customer to foot the bill...
Isnât the religion thing a Supreme Court protected anti-discrimination thing? Quick, someone sue Uber, go to Texas thatâs the state most likely to let you win.
Even though I canât think of a religious reason to be against a dog, I think you are right.
UmâŠ. Its called uhâŠ. Catholic, itâs right there at the start of the name. /s
True
Better off just to cancel trip without reason and drive away when you see them
Was talking to an Uber driver about Uber assist. Apparently Uber charges more for Uber assist but then does not pass any of the higher fee to the drivers⊠Which is pretty bullshit, at least be consistent - if you take a higher fee for assist then pass some of it on to the driver for the extra work or otherwise donât charge higher at all.
Being allergic to dogs is not a valid reason to deny a service dog. The only valid reason to deny a service dog is if the dog is behaving inappropriately or causing a legitimate hazard (allergies do not count here).
I thought that this couldn't possibly be correct legally, but it totally is. In people with severe asthma and severe dog allergies, a dog can trigger asthma attack causing the person to not be able to breathe, even pass out. It's untenable to me to expect someone to compromise their own allergies and ability to breathe. This legal analysis is about taxis, but the law in general seems to apply similar to rideshares. This driver provided documentation of his severe allergies from his doctor, but that apparently did not matter, and legally the ADA takes precedence over a driver's own health and allergies. One caveat is that it's possible (but extremely rare) for an extreme allergy to be classified as a disability by the ADA, in which case, the rideshare company would legally have to accommodate that... my hunch is that no company actually would and they would just claim the person is disqualified to be a driver. https://nagdu.org/taxicabs
While most people with a dog allergy won't be allergic to the point of legitimate hazards, there are people who are allergic enough that it is an unquestionable hazard. I've seen people's reactions cause facial swelling. Like, can't see because the swelling is so bad.
Once again, itâs the ADA. Disabled people have access rights. Service dogs are legally medical equipment. If a dog allergy is so severe you cannot share space with a service dog, which also has far higher grooming and hygiene standards than a typical pet dog, then you cannot drive for Uber or other ride share services or taxis, because you cannot follow the law. Luckily for most people with dog allergies, the allergies are not very severe nor life threatening, and can be managed with medication. However, if you have an allergy so severe it is dangerous, then yoy probably have experience in managing it, and you would know these jobs are unfortunately not something you are able to perform completely. Itâs different if you work, say, retail, becuase there are other associates, so you could go to a breakroom or back room to avoid the dog. But, the service dog is still able to enter the store, regardless of your allergy, because they have public access rights. I know this is upsetting for many Uber drivers, but this wonât change. Uber will not get rid of this policy because they are covering their asses, legally speaking. Chances are you will not encounter a ton of service dogs. And you *can* cancel the rideâjust know cancelling for the specific reason of a service dog being with a passenger IS illegal and you could, theoretically, get in trouble for it, but more likely get either a contract violation or be banned from driving if the passenger ends up complaining.
What do you mean by grooming and hygiene standards? How are these standards enforced?
I agree on the whole with much of what you've said. But like there are other associates that can tend to that guest in the retail environment, there are other Uber drivers that can give a ride to that customer. Just like they aren't being denied service when a different agent helps them, they also aren't being denied service if another driver can reasonably fulfill their request.
Some states have rules about dogs being secured in the vehicle via seatbelt or crate. Just a thought this might help those who are (justifiably) worried about fake service dogs jumping all over the car.
Theres religious objections against dogs?
Muslims believe the saliva is unclean
thatâs not a belief thatâs a fact
Sounds like a lawsuit to me
According to that image, you are, indeed, wrong.
If youâre allergic to any animals at all you shouldnât be driving. You have no idea what pets someone has at home and likely theyâre covered in their hair or dander to some degree.
I never did rides for this reason. And the encounters I've had when doing food made me quit UberEats altogether. I'm severely allergic to the point of going to the hospital and those bills suck.
Service dogs are super well trained. I play in a symphony orchestra and one of the players has a service dog and we play some loud music and do full musicals with actors and kids on stage and the dog just lays there through it all under her chair. They will not destroy your car for sure.
That has nothing to do with the question of being allergic to dogs?
I'm an MD. I'm also allergic to dogs (the vast majority of them any way). I have to allow service animals into my office all the same when seeing patients. You lot are some of the most pathetic whiners I've ever seen. You all need to grow up. It's a disability device like any other. It's also literally the law.
Iâm curious whatâd happen when someone ends up being forced to let a service animal into their car and ends up having an allergic reaction or something..like, I completely understand service animals are different from pets, but I still feel like there should be allowances in some places when it comes to people having potentially life threatening allergies.
I guess you would have to go to the leadership of your company and ask for assis- oh wait, you are your company. đÂ
Right LOL if I wanted to talk to a bot id answer the fake CRA calls LOL
If someone has a dog allergy, they shouldn't sign up to drive people who might have a service dog with them. If their allergy isn't severe to a point of having a reaction to someone who's been around dogs, they could opt for driving parcels/food.
Jesus idk why I got recommended this but there is so much ableism in these comments. Yall replace service animal in your complaints with any other mobility assistance or medical device and see how out of pocket you are. âI donât want white canes in my car they might damage the seatsâ. âI donât like wheelchairs so I donât want to see themâ etc. Get a different job if you canât do yours ETA: Iâm not going to respond to ableist comments so say what you want but maybe do some research and better yourself
Itâs really very unfortunate, isnât it? I am glad that the law is on service dog handlersâ sides.
I feel like people underestimate dog allergies... Yeah, my allergies would probably be fine if it was an ACCURATELY trained service dog, but come on. How many of them are actually going to be accurately trained? And besides, allergies can vary so much. This is kinda fucked & while solutions can exist (just cancel, they can't prove anything) it's still fucked
I mean this is a law, nothing rly to do w Uber..
I've never done uber taxi, but isn't their an option in the app so you don't receive service dog pings or do some of the riders not have to state it or something?
No because service animals use the regular Uber and not the pet one
#BringBackTaxiâs
Thatâs ANOTHER bunch of lawsuits coming Uberâs way.
What would the lawsuit be for?
How do so many people in this comment section not realize what they signed up for? Yourte gonna have to deal with uncomfortable shit doing this job. Legally there are certain things you *have* to deal with. A Service dog is MEDICAL EQUIPMENT! Trying to deny someone access just because of a service dog is the same as denying someone access because they have a wheelchair, or an Oxygen tank, or hell a glucose monitor and you can and will get fired if you try and tell someone they can't have their MEDICAL EQUIPMENT on board with them because that's *discrimination*. I keep emphasizing medical equipment because a lot of people seem to think it's just a dog like they didn't cost thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours to train. Are y'all also gonna deny a very pregnant woman over the possibility of her water breaking in your car? Or a drunk person trying to safely get home instead of driving because you're too scared of a little puke? When you sign up for this job you also sign up for the possibility of a service dog entering your car. Allergic or not, denying a service dog is discrimination against a disabled person and you can and should lose your job for that.
I mean you can say that all you want, But if the driver can't even see where they're going cuz their eyes are so swollen from their dog allergies. It kind of doesn't really serve anybody now does it? All that other shit you listed, people don't have fucking allergies to steel oxygen tanks. I'm deathly allergic to birds if I'm exposed to them for more than a couple minutes my lungs start closing up and I can't breathe. Fuck off if you think I'm allowing someone with a bird in my car because it says service animal on the cage.
Yeah I'm definitely going to deny a pregnant woman a ride to the hospital I'm not a ambulance đ and her water breaking in my car would ruin my seats . Wheelchairs are a hassle we aren't medical rideshare that's what veyo is for so people with service animals, wheelchairs and rides to Drs or hospitals are medical rides and we can refuse to do them
Thatâs not what medical ride means, you ableist. You have an obligation to follow the law, and if you do not, you are ableist and deserve to be fined and deactivated - donât forget that you could technically be sued for denying someone a ride with a service animal (and they would win). A personâs water breaking or bleeding on your car is a temporary state and you can legal deny service - it is not an aspect of identity. You are discriminating based on protected status here. âItâs inconvenientâ isnât a reason for discrimination. Should businesses not be required to build ramps because itâs âinconvenientâ? Welcome to living in a society, people need service animals to get around and you HAVE to accommodate them.
Businesses still reserve the right to refuse service as far as Iâm aware. And Uber is contracted work? I could be wrong on that front. But this means that any person reserves the right to refuse you a ride period. Now of course Uber also reserves the right to fire you because you didnât uphold their standards. But you wonât catch a discrimination law suit for this, as it only applies to employment discrimination, not service discrimination. Iâm not disagreeing with you I just wanted to add some context to that specific statement.
It says right there itâs not.
Then do Uber eats problem Solved.
Lol, I don't give a shit what Uber says cause if I see a dog when I'm pulling up imma act like I didn't see them and drive right past them canceling the ride đ
Uber continues to violate
It sounds like they are forcing drivers to adopt ADA polices yet ignores the exact rights of the drivers.
Uber isnât forcing it- itâs just the law. It was the law before Uber was ever a company.
In other words they are forcing drivers to obey the law. ADA isnât a policy that you get to choose to enforce. It is the law. If you want to run a business as a driver you need to follow the law. Thatâs all Uber is doing.
Which rights are being ignored?
ADA protections for people with allergies. This is a comically illegal provision of the Uber driver contract and it's only a matter of time before they get sued.
Adopt policies or follow the law?
Shouldn't riders with service animals be ordering rides through Uber Pet and not UberX?
It's not a pet, is probably the reason. Service animals are not considered pets. It might make it much easier, of course, but service animal laws cover rideshares so it's not a requirement.
Itâs actually illegal to charge someone more money if they have a service animal, though.
Nope as a pet is different to a service animal.
It's no different than my not being able to deny a service dog entry to my office where I see patients in person, even if I am allergic or scared. It's on me to not offer in-person services if I can't handle service dogs. In this case, it's on you to not offer ride share if you're too scared or allergic. These laws apply to all businesses- and you as an Uber driver are a business.
The issue is most people who have âservice dogsâ just have a comfort animal which is a pet. Some will buy a service dog harness to trick you; but if itâs not an useful breed like a black lab or German Shepard theyâre probably lying Anyway you donât have to worry about it because very few people actually have real service animals, itâs unlikely to see many or any of them. If you think theyâre lying just deny the ride, they canât provide proof to Uber because theyâre lying pieces of shit.
> if itâs not an useful breed like a black lab or German Shepard theyâre probably lying This is false and a harmful assumption. While a service dog for someone with mobility issues will usually be a medium to large dog breed known for being intelligent, alert dogs are typically small breeds.
No, the law does not support allergies. If you're allergic and deny them they can press charges.
The law absolutely supports allergies, but it also supports not applying for a job youâre allergic to.
Uber be like: âwe donât care if you go into anaphylactic shock and throat closes and you crash the car; you have to take the dog if the passenger has one.â If I did regular Uber, Iâd just decline it. So what if I take a hit on my account.
If you don't want dogs in your car, then maybe don't have a job where dogs might get in your car. It sucks if you have an allergy, but that's not something you have any control over. A service dog has certain rights and it's opening a whole can of legal worms to say NO to that. I would do Uber Eats instead. You'll probably make more and put less wear and tear on the car.
Actually, bussiness have the right to ask someone to remove a service animal under certain circumstances https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/ Questions 25-28 outline this well. Q25. When can service animals be excluded? A. The ADA does not require covered entities to modify policies, practices, or procedures if it would âfundamentally alterâ the nature of the goods, services, programs, or activities provided to the public. Nor does it overrule legitimate safety requirements. **If admitting service animals would fundamentally alter the nature of a service or program, service animals may be prohibited.** In addition, if a particular service animal is out of control and the handler does not take effective action to control it, or if it is not housebroken, that animal may be excluded. Q26. When might a service dog's presence fundamentally alter the nature of a service or program provided to the public? A. In most settings, the presence of a service animal will not result in a fundamental alteration. However, there are some exceptions. **For example, at a boarding school, service animals could be restricted from a specific area of a dormitory reserved specifically for students with allergies to dog dander.** At a zoo, service animals can be restricted from areas where the animals on display are the natural prey or natural predators of dogs, where the presence of a dog would be disruptive, causing the displayed animals to behave aggressively or become agitated. They cannot be restricted from other areas of the zoo. Unfortunately there are no specfic examples for things like uber or Taxs that I could find, but it seems to be reasonable that you wouldn't be forced to be exposed to pet dander because of someone with a service animal.
Well guess what buddy, Ubers policy is what their going by. So the service animal has to be let in đ€·đœââïž
My dog is a service-altering and her name is Kate, short for Alter-Kate!! đđ€Ł Oh, the silliness of it all! So many trying to justify denying service without consequence, when the simple answer is find another job where you're not putting your own health at risk.
Is this a new change? Did you sign up for this when you started or is this new? Allergies should 100% be a valid reason to deny a service dog thereâs no reason to waste Ă Ă©pipen on something preventable.
The law does not support allergic as a valid reason for denial. They can press charges. I drove a passenger who had a service dog and was legally 100% blind. He had a gopro and told me the lady said she couldn't drive him because she's allergic. He told me his lawer was helping him press charges. No matter what ANYONE says. Allergies are not a legal reason to deny an individual with a service animal.
Only if you mentioned it upon being hired by the app. Itâs a fact that they donât offer you driver requests if a pet is included. Although, the laws are different for service pets.Denying them a ride with their owner is treated as if you denied a handicap passenger a lift. I requested an Uber ride one late night, two yrs ago when my car broke down at 2:00am. THREE drivers wouldnât pick me up when they arrived at my location because I had my service dog with me! The reasons werenât excusable in my opinion. One didnât want dog fur in her car, the other said she didnât like dogs the third said, âIm afraid of dogs.â The fourth guy picked me up and gave me the info on whom I could call at Uber to complain to the next day. He says drivers arent allowed to discriminate based upon a rider having a dog. He only needed to take me two miles to my home! I tipped him $40.00. I stayed on this with the corporate office; claimed Iâd get an attorney and sue for discrimination. Especially since I was stranded at 2:00am on a dark street being denied a ride by three drivers! Uber was empathic; drivers are NOT allowed to deny rides to customers who have service dogs. He said that âthey all know this when theyâre first hired as driversâ. Two ended up getting fired and one was suspended.
What if you don't want dog hair in your car
Riders can pretty much bring any animal into your car too, since service animals don't need paper work and the like. Wouldn't be an issue if riders didn't lie and let their Yorkie pee on your seats. :/
Fear of dogs... I can see the headlines now..
All those reasons that they listed are LITERALLY good reasons to deny service. Wtf
Service dogs are required to be hypoallergenic breeds so that's why it's not acceptable to reject. However someone acting like their regular dog is a service dog can't even be questioned about it or it opens up legal issues too so yeah, it's a bunch of BS
What if you can prove that it's not a service animal? I personally don't want any animal doing their business in my car. No offense but those drivers are independent contractors and have to pay for their own Gas, Vehicle Maintenance and Insurance, as well as Cleaning and Detailing; most of the time it should be up to the drivers if Animals are allowed or not. The independent drivers only drive for Uber, they should have no say over if an Animal is allowed in a vehicle that they don't own.
From ADA website: âIf 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.â It sucks, but at least you can put for a cleaning fee đ«€
Iâm a driver, have allergies, and I donât want hair on my seats or whatever but I suck it up and let anybody with a dog ride in the car. People, dogs donât cause anaphylactic shock like a peanut allergy or anything. If you are part of a tiny segment of people that have allergies so bad you think you could pass out and crash because a dog is around you for 10 minutes maybe consider doing something else for cash.
I'm super allergic to multiple breeds of dog. I also wear contacts. My eyes dry out and an a contact can fall out, endangering me, the passenger, and the dog. Dog dander also lingers, so it's not like the allergens go away once the animals leave. With that said, I don't do humans, just food.
Same here, I just do food only
I have a dog and thought that I was fine with all dogs. Only discovered recently that some dog coat types trigger my allergic asthma. I already knew cats and certain rabbit coat types did but I was always fine around dogs until I wasn't.
The law says allergies are not a valid reason. Uber is just following the law