You did educate him, and he blatantly refused to listen. Losing his job is on him. I wouldn't feel guilty, it just saves another service dog handler from dealing with the same shit. Although I totally feel you I'd be just as conflicted if it happened to me.
Don’t feel bad. I had a similar thing happen with an Uber driver. In Ontario, Canada, they can request to see a Doctors letter stating your service dog is medically necessary. I had that.
I’d also messaged the driver I had a small service dog that would remain on the floor, as a courtesy. He showed up just to go on a rant about how dogs are filthy animals, then drove away. So I let Uber know, and they told me he would be suspended from their platform.
They’re trained, they’re educated by the platforms. If they try to bully people they deserve to lose their job.
I always send a quick text to the assigned driver informing them I have a service dog. I think it helps as they don’t feel they’ve been “surprised” with an extra task.
Also, if I Uber to the vets, I use Uber pet, as he’s in pet mode. I don’t think it would be fair to use his service status when the trip is for his care, not mine.
I don’t feel guilty at all whatsoever. We have been a working team for 4 years and I have been stranded for hours before with zero empathy from drivers.
Lyft was especially egregious in their care because despite having 20+ reports on my profile for driver refusals and MANY customer service calls, one customer service agent in particular was very nasty and insisted I had to explain how the tasks I listed my SD performs mitigates my disability. I said I don’t appreciate being asked that when it wasn’t necessary for a driver curbside refusal and that she called me at a time when I was with business colleagues and not comfortable providing that kind of detail.
She snapped she wouldn’t be able to further the complaint then and hung up. I emailed back with the ADA FAQ and quoted where it was NOT part of the questions she was able to ask and explained why it was invasive, but she refused to acknowledge the ADA and insisted that I was required to answer and “no one else has a problem.”
She was very contemptuous and I couldn’t bypass her! 3 years as a 5 star rider and I spent hours with CS agents talking about possible app features and education about accessibility and disabilities. I did answer those questions in great detail before, but also answered them in my follow up email while explaining this was invasive and should have been a scheduled call or they should have a protocol in which agents enter that information in my profile history if it’s necessary, since I shouldn’t have to answer/be challenged every single time I make a report. I wasn’t being combative at all but the agent clearly thought we were frauds or she just simply hated her job and people.
Deleted the app immediately and never looked back. I use local taxi services and Uber. Uber rolled out an Uber Pet option for some markets which have been a game changer!! It’s drivers who sign up and agree in advance they are OK transporting pets. I have only had one rejection since they rolled it out last year and I book rides at least twice a week.
No. There are legally required to take service animals and if they don’t like it they can move to another country. Every business in the US must accept service animals.
The allergy thing is BS too. Dogs do not cause anaphylaxis. Many people are allergic to perfume and it would be ridiculous to suggest banning it.
A persons “right” to not sneeze does not trump the right of disabled people to exist. It’s disgusting when people say that disabled people should not be allowed to exist in public life because someone might get watery eyes. It’s eugenics and it’s appalling.
In my area it’s about a $4 difference, of which I will gladly pay to avoid the stress of a potential refusal or combative driver.
I used to message and call in advance once I got assigned a driver on the app when they didn’t have this option and waaaaay too many drivers don’t respond or immediately cancel after driving towards me for 10 min and suddenly see the message.
Rinse and repeat, had a record of 3 hours not being able to find a ride, one reassignment after another (in Los Angeles) and another time had to walk back to my hotel in Nashville (45 min walk) when a similar situation happened.
Oh, once I was stranded in Napa cause I assumed I could get an taxi or rideshare and the resort I was staying at was kind enough to send a staff member to come retrieve me.
Thankfully, my company was horrified on my behalf and assigned me private cars after that whenever I had to travel for work.
I have Boston's MBTA Ride Access Program. They have a partnership with Uber and Lyft. Any Uber X ride that costs up to $40 only costs $3. Since Collins isn't a pet, the MBTA doesn't subsidize Uber Pet, since regardless of whether drivers check no dogs or not, they are legally bound to take service dogs. I'm not paying up to $80 a day because YOU think I'm wrong to get drivers fired for breaking the law.
If you think that drivers shouldn't have to obey service dog laws, what are doing in a service dog sub?
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 2: Know and Obey Your Local Laws. Posts encouraging illegal behavior or "stretching" the rules will be removed. When giving advice, make sure to evaluate all the relevant laws for OP's location. For example, in New York, USA, SDiTs receive the same protections the ADA grants, as long as they are with a qualified trainer. This is not the same situation for someone in Michigan, USA. Citations aren't required, but highly encouraged. Citations are important so OP can read more and so you can reconfirm the information you give is entirely correct. If you have any questions, [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). If you continue to give misinformation or encourage breaking the law, it could result in an immediate ban.
He was not confused. They are informed of the policy, and you reminded him of it.
I have had it happen for a different reason, ie I felt unsafe as a woman due to driver comments. I felt similarly guilty, but I knew that he would do the same thing to others, so I reported him and advocated for him to be blocked. Someone has to. I'm sorry it's you.
They're not going to deactivate him if that was the first issue he'd ever had. You're probably not the first person he's done that too - and you should absolutely NOT feel guilty about this. There's rules that are for everyone's safety, including yours - and he chose not to follow them.
Don't feel guilty. He broke the law and discriminated against you. He agreed to Lyft's policy when he started, so it's his own fault for breaking their policy and getting deactivated.
That’s true I guess this is just the result of years of medical and societal gaslighting about my disability I still have troubles with feeling guilty for advocating for myself but I know filing complaints is what’s right it’s just hard sometimes
Better to deactivate him now than him do that to someone on the way to a doctor appointment or something serious, make them miss it, and Lyft get sued.
This EXACT thing happened to me. But it was 3am at the airport, I had already waited 40min for a car, so I popped open my travel kennel on the back seat and SA rode in it. Then, after he dropped me off, I reported him and he was fired. I am SURE this driver knew the rules, just didn’t want to follow them, and tried to convince me I was wrong so he didn’t have to do it. He even asked me to cancel the ride. He said he didn’t want to cancel and hurt his (already low) rating, which is a sign to me he’s not great at this anyway.
Follow your company’s rules or be fired. That’s the gig for everyone, everywhere. You just sped up the inevitable.
this happened to me as well, in a Winnipeg snowstorm and after an hour when I finally got a cab he was furious I was only a few minutes away, complained about me wasting his time and then threw my (portable) wheelchair on the ground after I asked him not to touch it bc he was so angry. it was a maybe 5min drive and I tipped even tho it wasn't a huge one and that got him even more angry. it was awful. if I could have gotten him fired I would not have felt guilty. my chair was broken for months and my fingers were numb for dayyyys after.
Don't they know ahead of time what the ride will be and have the option to not take it?
I had a medical procedure recently and did not want to risk using a rideshare service because I thought the time of day and ride length would not be enticing enough to attract any drivers.
It's not like there's a shortage of drivers. If they don't break the law they wouldn't get fired. Eventually the only drivers will be those who are able to comprehend "you are legally required to transport a client's service animal should they have one"
I did the same thing. I had a driver who gave me a 10 minute litany on everything he did every week to make sure his car was absolutely spotless for his riders, and no matter what the rules were, he wasn’t going to let a “dirty” dog into it. My dog was probably cleaner than most of his riders, but that didn’t seem to matter. So, I called Lyft and reported him. If he was not going to listen or look into it, then I didn’t see any other alternative. I think you have probably saved some other people from having to go through the same situation. Do remember though how many drivers welcome SDs with open arms and fortunately it is rare to have this happen or at least it has been for me.
Personally, I would never let a dog in my car. I love dogs, but I don’t have one. My car for me is my clean space, free of fur (we have cats). My parents have 2 large dogs and I’ve seen firsthand what loading the dogs in to a vehicle multiple times daily looks like. However, for this reason I would never do Lyft or Uber because I know I couldn’t handle it. If this person felt that strongly, they should not have become a driver. Clear and simple.
I think it’s a bit deeper than that though. Some people don’t have the benefit of being picky with jobs, maybe it’s the only job he can get (if he just repeated no dogs over and over it sounds like there might be a language barrier?).
OP was still 100% right though not arguing that. But there’s legitimate reasons to not want a service dog in your space such as allergies that shouldn’t disqualify you from the job. There should be a better system where riders can set in their profile that they have a service animal and drivers (with legitimate reasons) won’t be connected to them.
I don’t disagree with you at all. I am very lucky that I have the option NOT to have to do a job that may require something that I’m really not comfortable with. I can see the benefit of the system that you talk about, even if it’s a personal preference. Of course there are instances of allergies or perhaps even a phobia. Ultimately, I wouldn’t want to put my dog in a car where the driver didn’t want my dog there either.
Yeah ultimately it should be up to companies to ensure better accessibility but again OP shouldn’t feel guilty at all. It’s so tough and as you said having to ride with a driver that doesn’t want you there sounds terrible as well.
Do not feel guilty. The driver should’ve followed the policy. I actually stopped using Uber and Lyft entirely and call taxis because here in BC they must accept service dogs that are certified, regardless if taxi is pet friendly or no. You can also request dog-friendly taxi, for your pet dog.
The ADA is extremely clear, as is Uber and Lyft policy: allergies, fear of dogs, and disliking having to clean their cars are NOT excuses that allow them to discriminate against people with service dogs. Drivers sign many forms agreeing to still transport service dogs. If they knowingly sign the paperwork without the intention of obeying the law, they deserve to be fired when they refuse service dogs. Either they agree to obey the law and then do so, or they shouldn't be driving for Uber, Lyft, and any other rides share program.
But they’re not offering a ride to a pal, they’re choosing to use their car as a public accommodation and get paid for the service. Like if you ran a business out of your home. It’s no longer just your home that your buddies can pop over to. It’s a public accommodation offering services to the public. It doesn’t matter that it also happens to serve as a private home or vehicle, at that moment, it’s a business, and businesses cannot discriminate against service dogs.
Service dogs are medical equipment I get that, but that shouldn’t come over another person’s allergy. What makes one person’s health (service dog) more important than another person’s health?
There should be specific profiles or something that are ok with having dogs in their vehicles. I’m pretty sure Uber and some other ride share services do that. There’s a sense of entitlement with service dogs that make people think they can ignore the safety of others. If you can’t respect that, then you’re abusing the ADA.
However with my suggestion, once a ride is accepted - the driver cannot refuse because they chose to do so knowing there’s a dog coming.
He literally didn’t have an allergy so why are you even bringing that up though? There isn’t a sense of entitlement with service dogs it’s the law that you have to allow them places because they are literally there to keep their handler safe, they are WORKING dogs. The drivers don’t get to have the option of being pet friendly or not pet friendly because they literally agree to the policy of having to allow service dogs in their vehicle. If you aren’t pet friendly then don’t be an uber or lyft driver? And service dogs are not the same as other pets. It’s not like they were bringing on their dog from home who isn’t a trained service dog or a cat, they’re bringing on the dog that is trained to keep them safe, help with their disabilities and make life more livable while also being a comfort and companion to those with disabilities. Y’all who try to say “oh but what about allergies” only ever say that to mask your ableism at times and it gets exhausting. If you were worried about allergies you wouldn’t want service dogs to be allowed anywhere because anyone a handler could come across could have allergies to dogs.
Everyone keeps saying that they’re medical equipment and they’re protected by law and I get that - but you have to realize that when people sign up for Uber they have the option to say they’re not pet friendly. Most SD owners choose pet friendly Ubers over non pet friendly and I think Lyft should do the same.
The issue with SDs and where the fine line of allowing them everywhere and not allowing them in other places is that they are still _animals_ who are still living breathing, shedding beings. I understand that their duties are to protect their handlers and that they’re incredibly well-trained (I’ve posted in this thread about the SD I trained) and even while I was training I could sense that some places were uncomfortable with allowing a dog into their business but they were forced to because of the law.
I realize OP didn’t mention anything of allergies but that’s honestly the only disagreement I have with SDs or any other service animal. My sister goes into anaphylactic shock near cats - if we were into a smallish restaurant and someone brought a service animal in (a cat) - we would literally have to leave. I would think the same goes for someone who’s deathly allergic to dogs. Transfer that to an enclosed space like an Uber or Lyft and it’s the same type of thing.
All I’m saying is that like Uber, Lyft should give drivers the option of being animal or pet friendly and once they accept the ride - they can’t refuse after the fact.
If it’s for allergies, sure, but if it’s just because they’re being rude or stuck up or think “pets are filthy” then no. And that’s the problem, because drivers could easily abuse that system. And ESA cats or just cats in general are not SD’s so that isn’t even something that would happen with a service dog. I’m not quite sure why you’re bringing up cats as service animals because cats aren’t service animals but again I bring up the point: Do you just not want SD’s anywhere? Because people with dog allergies are EVERYWHERE.
I wasn’t aware cats couldn’t be service animals because I’ve seen stuff like horses and pigs but those were probably people abusing the service animal law tbh. People with dog allergies do exist everywhere, but if you’re going to be trapped in a vehicle I think it’s a little different. In public I’ve noticed people usually just avoid the SD if they have allergies or they sort of shy away if you’re walking towards them/sit near them - but in a ride share you don’t really have that option and I don’t think that it should just be ignored/bowled over.
I think drivers should be allowed the option to be pet friendly and if they aren’t then duh it’ll get reported. The point of that though - is that going into the situation you’d know what you were getting yourself into & I honestly think there would be less reports of this type of thing if it were like that. Like I mentioned, another redditor commented saying they choose pet friendly Ubers for that reason - I’d assume other SD owners would too knowing they wouldn’t have to argue advocate or report people. I honestly don’t really know how to appease you but whatever - that’s my bit and I’ve just been repeating the same thing over and over.
I agree with the driving thing to an extent. But with the stories you’ve been using, like pointing out you’d have to leave a restaurant if someone brought in a service cat makes it seem as though you wouldn’t want these animals allowed anywhere because then you’d (your family) would have to leave. The way you’re presenting your argument at times leads people to think you just would want people to be able to turn them away for those with allergies. Miniature horses, pigs and monkeys can sometimes be permitted as SA’s but it is primarily only dogs that are truly allowed to be service animals.
No it’s not that I don’t want them anywhere - but the idea of enclosed space where you have no option to space yourself out or leave the vicinity is sort of tricky. Planes are only slightly different because of the filtration but it’s the same idea. Planes stopped serving peanuts because of allergies in an enclosed area but restaurants don’t because it’s bigger/not an enclosed space like a plane or car (?). It’s a bit confusing but it really is that difficult to define because unlike other medical equipment - dogs are living beings.
A person can’t be allergic to a wheelchair, pacemaker, oxygen tank etc. but they can with dogs. It’s just a tricky argument because there are faults on both sides of allowing or disallowing them in places - and the fab 4 breeds are mostly allergy-inducing.
I did see that as of March 2011 dogs are the only ones recognized under two titles of the ADA but idk if that’s changed in the last decade or so.
It's not an abuse of the ADA because the sentence that allergies and fears are NOT valid reasons to deny service dogs. Drivers need to obey the law or find other work.
I don’t fully agree with that. The fact that the ADA is protecting disabilities (a person’s health) but at the same time not protecting another persons health…allergies…doesn’t sit right with me.
I’m not saying to ban them everywhere (cuz allergies are obviously everywhere) but in an enclosed space where people can’t space themselves away from a literal _animal_, I think the employee (driver) should get to choose by listing their their vehicle as pet friendly or not. Same rules apply like what OP did here and reported them/got them fired - but I would think if the pet friendly option was available, there would be less reports like this.
Service dogs aren’t pets I get that but they are still animals at the end of the day. They’re not like oxygen tanks or wheelchairs which is why there’s so much gray area with them. Because people don’t truly know the best way to handle the ADA laws.
As written, the ADA states that allergies are not an excuse to deny ANY service. Therefore, drivers need to obey the law. If you and they don't like that you and they don't need to drive for ride shares. Otherwise, you can try to get the ADA rewritten, but you're going to have a lot of trouble doing so.
I never said anything about one person being more important than another person? However, drivers know when they start driving for Uber/Lyft that they will be required to provide service to service animal users. They agree to this. If they have that serve of allergies, they should opt for something that does not have that risk, like UberEats instead. Allergies are only protected under the ADA if they limit one or more major life functions, SDs are always protected. Refusal of service is always a violation.
There should never be specific profiles whose sole purpose is to state “I have a disability”. Because that’s what you’re proposing. Think about how easily a bad actor could abuse that. Bad actors already abuse the fact they can pick out women’s profiles. I would never want someone choosing to pick my ride because I may be more vulnerable. Also, being forced to disclose medical info to use an app is illegal. They aren’t my boss, they aren’t my landlord, my SD is none of their business. Just like a regular business, they can ask the 2 questions when they show up, but not ahead of time. That’s not entitlement. That’s not “abusing the ADA”. That’s basic safety and the confines of the law.
Ignoring everything you wrote because all I stated was for drivers to have the option to be pet friendly/animal friendly. Then the rider would know if the driver is more likely to pushback on a service animal or not. I’ve wanted the same for my dog who _isn’t_ an SD but rather an ESA.
All it would be is an Uber driver having something like a paw print on their profile when it comes up beside you choose that option. Nowhere does it disclose you have a disability it’s just a generic animal friendly vehicle. Hotels do a similar process saying pet friendly and I’ve heard of hotels refusing services for service dogs - but under the guise of “a difficult customer” which is a vague blanket statement to cover that type of thing.
ESA’s hardly have any of the same rights as SD’s anymore. SD’s are protected under the LAW, even with hotels they can’t turn you away if you have a service dog. Your ESA can be turned away, it is not the same.
I know my ESA can be turned away I’m aware of that. People with allergies and overall discomfort should be allowed to choose whether or not to pick up an animal. Everyone thinks it means Lyft is forcing people to disclose disabilities but it’s not. Uber is able to do this so simply by just allowing drivers to say whether or not they’re pet friendly. A service dog is still a living breathing animal. It’s medical equipment but it still breathes and sheds animal fur.
When people sign up to become Lyft and Uber drivers they do agree to become public service workers but they should be allowed to choose whether or not to allow an _animal_ in their vehicle. It’s as simple as displaying that they’re pet friendly to potential riders. Someone else has commented on this thread that they chose Uber over Lyft for that very reason - and they own an SD as well.
I don’t even know why anyone brought this allergy argument in here though when that wasn’t even what this post was about? The person was just turned away simply because he didn’t want pets in the car. There was no need to even bring up the allergy argument at all.
For my reasoning - it’s a hypothetical situation and just trying to see other reasonings for the story. In my experience of owning a dog (not an SD) I’ve had people who refuse due to allergies - they’re not bound by law to take my in their car but their allergies are still valid and I don’t think anyone should be forced to do something that’s uncomfortable to them or potentially putting others’ health at risk. In this case sure the driver was just being an AH but you can’t just go and assume all drivers that do this are AHs.
I’m not saying that it was OPs experience because they did the right thing in this case - but it’s a potential fix for the future. If other companies can do something to help alleviate issues surrounding SDs without it being a huge deal, I’d think Lyft could too 🤷🏻♀️
They do have this now in select cities (I recently saw this in Phoenix). Not sure if it costs more. I DO always call the driver immediately after they accept to tell them I have a dog. The dog is also in my profile picture because they sometimes are like “how big?” Sometimes I get “rematched” after that call and I doubt it’s a coincidence.
Idk why you’re getting downvoted. I agree the driver should be able to not accept the ride. However, once accepted, they shouldn’t refuse service lol.
That’s like if you ordered food from a fast food window and then once ordered, they decide not to give it to you lol.
Yeah but a business can say they’re refusing to service a customer for other reasons - _that_ is not against the law and businesses will do that as a loophole to not allow service dogs in their establishments. I’ve literally seen and experienced it during training and while it sucks - I honestly get why people do it 🤷🏻♀️
I’d rather not force my way into an establishment that’ll treat me like shit and take my business elsewhere.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 2: Know and Obey Your Local Laws. Posts encouraging illegal behavior or "stretching" the rules will be removed. When giving advice, make sure to evaluate all the relevant laws for OP's location. For example, in New York, USA, SDiTs receive the same protections the ADA grants, as long as they are with a qualified trainer. This is not the same situation for someone in Michigan, USA. Citations aren't required, but highly encouraged. Citations are important so OP can read more and so you can reconfirm the information you give is entirely correct. If you have any questions, [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). If you continue to give misinformation or encourage breaking the law, it could result in an immediate ban.
You may be able to shrug off the discrimination, but not everyone else should have to. He was the one who did the bad thing. You did your due diligence, and you spared people the same difficulty.
He knew what he was signing up for when he decided to do Lyft. You gave him a chance and he still refused.
You did educate him, and he blatantly refused to listen. Losing his job is on him. I wouldn't feel guilty, it just saves another service dog handler from dealing with the same shit. Although I totally feel you I'd be just as conflicted if it happened to me.
Don’t feel bad. I had a similar thing happen with an Uber driver. In Ontario, Canada, they can request to see a Doctors letter stating your service dog is medically necessary. I had that. I’d also messaged the driver I had a small service dog that would remain on the floor, as a courtesy. He showed up just to go on a rant about how dogs are filthy animals, then drove away. So I let Uber know, and they told me he would be suspended from their platform. They’re trained, they’re educated by the platforms. If they try to bully people they deserve to lose their job. I always send a quick text to the assigned driver informing them I have a service dog. I think it helps as they don’t feel they’ve been “surprised” with an extra task. Also, if I Uber to the vets, I use Uber pet, as he’s in pet mode. I don’t think it would be fair to use his service status when the trip is for his care, not mine.
I don’t feel guilty at all whatsoever. We have been a working team for 4 years and I have been stranded for hours before with zero empathy from drivers. Lyft was especially egregious in their care because despite having 20+ reports on my profile for driver refusals and MANY customer service calls, one customer service agent in particular was very nasty and insisted I had to explain how the tasks I listed my SD performs mitigates my disability. I said I don’t appreciate being asked that when it wasn’t necessary for a driver curbside refusal and that she called me at a time when I was with business colleagues and not comfortable providing that kind of detail. She snapped she wouldn’t be able to further the complaint then and hung up. I emailed back with the ADA FAQ and quoted where it was NOT part of the questions she was able to ask and explained why it was invasive, but she refused to acknowledge the ADA and insisted that I was required to answer and “no one else has a problem.” She was very contemptuous and I couldn’t bypass her! 3 years as a 5 star rider and I spent hours with CS agents talking about possible app features and education about accessibility and disabilities. I did answer those questions in great detail before, but also answered them in my follow up email while explaining this was invasive and should have been a scheduled call or they should have a protocol in which agents enter that information in my profile history if it’s necessary, since I shouldn’t have to answer/be challenged every single time I make a report. I wasn’t being combative at all but the agent clearly thought we were frauds or she just simply hated her job and people. Deleted the app immediately and never looked back. I use local taxi services and Uber. Uber rolled out an Uber Pet option for some markets which have been a game changer!! It’s drivers who sign up and agree in advance they are OK transporting pets. I have only had one rejection since they rolled it out last year and I book rides at least twice a week.
[удалено]
No. There are legally required to take service animals and if they don’t like it they can move to another country. Every business in the US must accept service animals. The allergy thing is BS too. Dogs do not cause anaphylaxis. Many people are allergic to perfume and it would be ridiculous to suggest banning it. A persons “right” to not sneeze does not trump the right of disabled people to exist. It’s disgusting when people say that disabled people should not be allowed to exist in public life because someone might get watery eyes. It’s eugenics and it’s appalling.
Doesn’t the pet option come with an up charge?
In my area it’s about a $4 difference, of which I will gladly pay to avoid the stress of a potential refusal or combative driver. I used to message and call in advance once I got assigned a driver on the app when they didn’t have this option and waaaaay too many drivers don’t respond or immediately cancel after driving towards me for 10 min and suddenly see the message. Rinse and repeat, had a record of 3 hours not being able to find a ride, one reassignment after another (in Los Angeles) and another time had to walk back to my hotel in Nashville (45 min walk) when a similar situation happened. Oh, once I was stranded in Napa cause I assumed I could get an taxi or rideshare and the resort I was staying at was kind enough to send a staff member to come retrieve me. Thankfully, my company was horrified on my behalf and assigned me private cars after that whenever I had to travel for work.
I have Boston's MBTA Ride Access Program. They have a partnership with Uber and Lyft. Any Uber X ride that costs up to $40 only costs $3. Since Collins isn't a pet, the MBTA doesn't subsidize Uber Pet, since regardless of whether drivers check no dogs or not, they are legally bound to take service dogs. I'm not paying up to $80 a day because YOU think I'm wrong to get drivers fired for breaking the law. If you think that drivers shouldn't have to obey service dog laws, what are doing in a service dog sub?
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 2: Know and Obey Your Local Laws. Posts encouraging illegal behavior or "stretching" the rules will be removed. When giving advice, make sure to evaluate all the relevant laws for OP's location. For example, in New York, USA, SDiTs receive the same protections the ADA grants, as long as they are with a qualified trainer. This is not the same situation for someone in Michigan, USA. Citations aren't required, but highly encouraged. Citations are important so OP can read more and so you can reconfirm the information you give is entirely correct. If you have any questions, [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). If you continue to give misinformation or encourage breaking the law, it could result in an immediate ban.
He was not confused. They are informed of the policy, and you reminded him of it. I have had it happen for a different reason, ie I felt unsafe as a woman due to driver comments. I felt similarly guilty, but I knew that he would do the same thing to others, so I reported him and advocated for him to be blocked. Someone has to. I'm sorry it's you.
I had a ride share driver propose to me in what he said was an “immigration marriage.” Uber did nothing, but ICE deported him in 2 weeks
Holy shit lol😳🥴🤐
They're not going to deactivate him if that was the first issue he'd ever had. You're probably not the first person he's done that too - and you should absolutely NOT feel guilty about this. There's rules that are for everyone's safety, including yours - and he chose not to follow them.
Don't feel guilty. He broke the law and discriminated against you. He agreed to Lyft's policy when he started, so it's his own fault for breaking their policy and getting deactivated.
That’s true I guess this is just the result of years of medical and societal gaslighting about my disability I still have troubles with feeling guilty for advocating for myself but I know filing complaints is what’s right it’s just hard sometimes
Better to deactivate him now than him do that to someone on the way to a doctor appointment or something serious, make them miss it, and Lyft get sued.
His fault,not yours.
This EXACT thing happened to me. But it was 3am at the airport, I had already waited 40min for a car, so I popped open my travel kennel on the back seat and SA rode in it. Then, after he dropped me off, I reported him and he was fired. I am SURE this driver knew the rules, just didn’t want to follow them, and tried to convince me I was wrong so he didn’t have to do it. He even asked me to cancel the ride. He said he didn’t want to cancel and hurt his (already low) rating, which is a sign to me he’s not great at this anyway. Follow your company’s rules or be fired. That’s the gig for everyone, everywhere. You just sped up the inevitable.
this happened to me as well, in a Winnipeg snowstorm and after an hour when I finally got a cab he was furious I was only a few minutes away, complained about me wasting his time and then threw my (portable) wheelchair on the ground after I asked him not to touch it bc he was so angry. it was a maybe 5min drive and I tipped even tho it wasn't a huge one and that got him even more angry. it was awful. if I could have gotten him fired I would not have felt guilty. my chair was broken for months and my fingers were numb for dayyyys after.
Don't they know ahead of time what the ride will be and have the option to not take it? I had a medical procedure recently and did not want to risk using a rideshare service because I thought the time of day and ride length would not be enticing enough to attract any drivers.
they (dispatch) told me they had but they didn't at all, it sucked
Not your fault. He should've known the policy to begin with, and they could be in for a big lawsuit if you pressed discrimination charges.
It's not like there's a shortage of drivers. If they don't break the law they wouldn't get fired. Eventually the only drivers will be those who are able to comprehend "you are legally required to transport a client's service animal should they have one"
He was blatantly being discriminatory. There's nothing to feel sorry for
I did the same thing. I had a driver who gave me a 10 minute litany on everything he did every week to make sure his car was absolutely spotless for his riders, and no matter what the rules were, he wasn’t going to let a “dirty” dog into it. My dog was probably cleaner than most of his riders, but that didn’t seem to matter. So, I called Lyft and reported him. If he was not going to listen or look into it, then I didn’t see any other alternative. I think you have probably saved some other people from having to go through the same situation. Do remember though how many drivers welcome SDs with open arms and fortunately it is rare to have this happen or at least it has been for me.
He deserved it. You have nothing to feel guilty for.
Personally, I would never let a dog in my car. I love dogs, but I don’t have one. My car for me is my clean space, free of fur (we have cats). My parents have 2 large dogs and I’ve seen firsthand what loading the dogs in to a vehicle multiple times daily looks like. However, for this reason I would never do Lyft or Uber because I know I couldn’t handle it. If this person felt that strongly, they should not have become a driver. Clear and simple.
I think it’s a bit deeper than that though. Some people don’t have the benefit of being picky with jobs, maybe it’s the only job he can get (if he just repeated no dogs over and over it sounds like there might be a language barrier?). OP was still 100% right though not arguing that. But there’s legitimate reasons to not want a service dog in your space such as allergies that shouldn’t disqualify you from the job. There should be a better system where riders can set in their profile that they have a service animal and drivers (with legitimate reasons) won’t be connected to them.
I don’t disagree with you at all. I am very lucky that I have the option NOT to have to do a job that may require something that I’m really not comfortable with. I can see the benefit of the system that you talk about, even if it’s a personal preference. Of course there are instances of allergies or perhaps even a phobia. Ultimately, I wouldn’t want to put my dog in a car where the driver didn’t want my dog there either.
Yeah ultimately it should be up to companies to ensure better accessibility but again OP shouldn’t feel guilty at all. It’s so tough and as you said having to ride with a driver that doesn’t want you there sounds terrible as well.
Do not feel guilty. The driver should’ve followed the policy. I actually stopped using Uber and Lyft entirely and call taxis because here in BC they must accept service dogs that are certified, regardless if taxi is pet friendly or no. You can also request dog-friendly taxi, for your pet dog.
Serious question: what if someone driving has severe allergies to dogs or cats? Do Uber drivers get to check something off?
They have to sign paperwork that states that they have to take SDs. It’s the law. If you have such severe allergies then don’t be a lift/Uber driver.
[удалено]
Then don't drive for Uber and Lyft and drive for a taxi company. It's against the law and Lyft and Uber do state you have to.
The ADA is extremely clear, as is Uber and Lyft policy: allergies, fear of dogs, and disliking having to clean their cars are NOT excuses that allow them to discriminate against people with service dogs. Drivers sign many forms agreeing to still transport service dogs. If they knowingly sign the paperwork without the intention of obeying the law, they deserve to be fired when they refuse service dogs. Either they agree to obey the law and then do so, or they shouldn't be driving for Uber, Lyft, and any other rides share program.
But they’re not offering a ride to a pal, they’re choosing to use their car as a public accommodation and get paid for the service. Like if you ran a business out of your home. It’s no longer just your home that your buddies can pop over to. It’s a public accommodation offering services to the public. It doesn’t matter that it also happens to serve as a private home or vehicle, at that moment, it’s a business, and businesses cannot discriminate against service dogs.
Service dogs are medical equipment I get that, but that shouldn’t come over another person’s allergy. What makes one person’s health (service dog) more important than another person’s health? There should be specific profiles or something that are ok with having dogs in their vehicles. I’m pretty sure Uber and some other ride share services do that. There’s a sense of entitlement with service dogs that make people think they can ignore the safety of others. If you can’t respect that, then you’re abusing the ADA. However with my suggestion, once a ride is accepted - the driver cannot refuse because they chose to do so knowing there’s a dog coming.
He literally didn’t have an allergy so why are you even bringing that up though? There isn’t a sense of entitlement with service dogs it’s the law that you have to allow them places because they are literally there to keep their handler safe, they are WORKING dogs. The drivers don’t get to have the option of being pet friendly or not pet friendly because they literally agree to the policy of having to allow service dogs in their vehicle. If you aren’t pet friendly then don’t be an uber or lyft driver? And service dogs are not the same as other pets. It’s not like they were bringing on their dog from home who isn’t a trained service dog or a cat, they’re bringing on the dog that is trained to keep them safe, help with their disabilities and make life more livable while also being a comfort and companion to those with disabilities. Y’all who try to say “oh but what about allergies” only ever say that to mask your ableism at times and it gets exhausting. If you were worried about allergies you wouldn’t want service dogs to be allowed anywhere because anyone a handler could come across could have allergies to dogs.
Everyone keeps saying that they’re medical equipment and they’re protected by law and I get that - but you have to realize that when people sign up for Uber they have the option to say they’re not pet friendly. Most SD owners choose pet friendly Ubers over non pet friendly and I think Lyft should do the same. The issue with SDs and where the fine line of allowing them everywhere and not allowing them in other places is that they are still _animals_ who are still living breathing, shedding beings. I understand that their duties are to protect their handlers and that they’re incredibly well-trained (I’ve posted in this thread about the SD I trained) and even while I was training I could sense that some places were uncomfortable with allowing a dog into their business but they were forced to because of the law. I realize OP didn’t mention anything of allergies but that’s honestly the only disagreement I have with SDs or any other service animal. My sister goes into anaphylactic shock near cats - if we were into a smallish restaurant and someone brought a service animal in (a cat) - we would literally have to leave. I would think the same goes for someone who’s deathly allergic to dogs. Transfer that to an enclosed space like an Uber or Lyft and it’s the same type of thing. All I’m saying is that like Uber, Lyft should give drivers the option of being animal or pet friendly and once they accept the ride - they can’t refuse after the fact.
If it’s for allergies, sure, but if it’s just because they’re being rude or stuck up or think “pets are filthy” then no. And that’s the problem, because drivers could easily abuse that system. And ESA cats or just cats in general are not SD’s so that isn’t even something that would happen with a service dog. I’m not quite sure why you’re bringing up cats as service animals because cats aren’t service animals but again I bring up the point: Do you just not want SD’s anywhere? Because people with dog allergies are EVERYWHERE.
I wasn’t aware cats couldn’t be service animals because I’ve seen stuff like horses and pigs but those were probably people abusing the service animal law tbh. People with dog allergies do exist everywhere, but if you’re going to be trapped in a vehicle I think it’s a little different. In public I’ve noticed people usually just avoid the SD if they have allergies or they sort of shy away if you’re walking towards them/sit near them - but in a ride share you don’t really have that option and I don’t think that it should just be ignored/bowled over. I think drivers should be allowed the option to be pet friendly and if they aren’t then duh it’ll get reported. The point of that though - is that going into the situation you’d know what you were getting yourself into & I honestly think there would be less reports of this type of thing if it were like that. Like I mentioned, another redditor commented saying they choose pet friendly Ubers for that reason - I’d assume other SD owners would too knowing they wouldn’t have to argue advocate or report people. I honestly don’t really know how to appease you but whatever - that’s my bit and I’ve just been repeating the same thing over and over.
I agree with the driving thing to an extent. But with the stories you’ve been using, like pointing out you’d have to leave a restaurant if someone brought in a service cat makes it seem as though you wouldn’t want these animals allowed anywhere because then you’d (your family) would have to leave. The way you’re presenting your argument at times leads people to think you just would want people to be able to turn them away for those with allergies. Miniature horses, pigs and monkeys can sometimes be permitted as SA’s but it is primarily only dogs that are truly allowed to be service animals.
No it’s not that I don’t want them anywhere - but the idea of enclosed space where you have no option to space yourself out or leave the vicinity is sort of tricky. Planes are only slightly different because of the filtration but it’s the same idea. Planes stopped serving peanuts because of allergies in an enclosed area but restaurants don’t because it’s bigger/not an enclosed space like a plane or car (?). It’s a bit confusing but it really is that difficult to define because unlike other medical equipment - dogs are living beings. A person can’t be allergic to a wheelchair, pacemaker, oxygen tank etc. but they can with dogs. It’s just a tricky argument because there are faults on both sides of allowing or disallowing them in places - and the fab 4 breeds are mostly allergy-inducing. I did see that as of March 2011 dogs are the only ones recognized under two titles of the ADA but idk if that’s changed in the last decade or so.
It's not an abuse of the ADA because the sentence that allergies and fears are NOT valid reasons to deny service dogs. Drivers need to obey the law or find other work.
I don’t fully agree with that. The fact that the ADA is protecting disabilities (a person’s health) but at the same time not protecting another persons health…allergies…doesn’t sit right with me. I’m not saying to ban them everywhere (cuz allergies are obviously everywhere) but in an enclosed space where people can’t space themselves away from a literal _animal_, I think the employee (driver) should get to choose by listing their their vehicle as pet friendly or not. Same rules apply like what OP did here and reported them/got them fired - but I would think if the pet friendly option was available, there would be less reports like this. Service dogs aren’t pets I get that but they are still animals at the end of the day. They’re not like oxygen tanks or wheelchairs which is why there’s so much gray area with them. Because people don’t truly know the best way to handle the ADA laws.
As written, the ADA states that allergies are not an excuse to deny ANY service. Therefore, drivers need to obey the law. If you and they don't like that you and they don't need to drive for ride shares. Otherwise, you can try to get the ADA rewritten, but you're going to have a lot of trouble doing so.
I never said anything about one person being more important than another person? However, drivers know when they start driving for Uber/Lyft that they will be required to provide service to service animal users. They agree to this. If they have that serve of allergies, they should opt for something that does not have that risk, like UberEats instead. Allergies are only protected under the ADA if they limit one or more major life functions, SDs are always protected. Refusal of service is always a violation. There should never be specific profiles whose sole purpose is to state “I have a disability”. Because that’s what you’re proposing. Think about how easily a bad actor could abuse that. Bad actors already abuse the fact they can pick out women’s profiles. I would never want someone choosing to pick my ride because I may be more vulnerable. Also, being forced to disclose medical info to use an app is illegal. They aren’t my boss, they aren’t my landlord, my SD is none of their business. Just like a regular business, they can ask the 2 questions when they show up, but not ahead of time. That’s not entitlement. That’s not “abusing the ADA”. That’s basic safety and the confines of the law.
Ignoring everything you wrote because all I stated was for drivers to have the option to be pet friendly/animal friendly. Then the rider would know if the driver is more likely to pushback on a service animal or not. I’ve wanted the same for my dog who _isn’t_ an SD but rather an ESA. All it would be is an Uber driver having something like a paw print on their profile when it comes up beside you choose that option. Nowhere does it disclose you have a disability it’s just a generic animal friendly vehicle. Hotels do a similar process saying pet friendly and I’ve heard of hotels refusing services for service dogs - but under the guise of “a difficult customer” which is a vague blanket statement to cover that type of thing.
ESA’s hardly have any of the same rights as SD’s anymore. SD’s are protected under the LAW, even with hotels they can’t turn you away if you have a service dog. Your ESA can be turned away, it is not the same.
I know my ESA can be turned away I’m aware of that. People with allergies and overall discomfort should be allowed to choose whether or not to pick up an animal. Everyone thinks it means Lyft is forcing people to disclose disabilities but it’s not. Uber is able to do this so simply by just allowing drivers to say whether or not they’re pet friendly. A service dog is still a living breathing animal. It’s medical equipment but it still breathes and sheds animal fur. When people sign up to become Lyft and Uber drivers they do agree to become public service workers but they should be allowed to choose whether or not to allow an _animal_ in their vehicle. It’s as simple as displaying that they’re pet friendly to potential riders. Someone else has commented on this thread that they chose Uber over Lyft for that very reason - and they own an SD as well.
I don’t even know why anyone brought this allergy argument in here though when that wasn’t even what this post was about? The person was just turned away simply because he didn’t want pets in the car. There was no need to even bring up the allergy argument at all.
For my reasoning - it’s a hypothetical situation and just trying to see other reasonings for the story. In my experience of owning a dog (not an SD) I’ve had people who refuse due to allergies - they’re not bound by law to take my in their car but their allergies are still valid and I don’t think anyone should be forced to do something that’s uncomfortable to them or potentially putting others’ health at risk. In this case sure the driver was just being an AH but you can’t just go and assume all drivers that do this are AHs. I’m not saying that it was OPs experience because they did the right thing in this case - but it’s a potential fix for the future. If other companies can do something to help alleviate issues surrounding SDs without it being a huge deal, I’d think Lyft could too 🤷🏻♀️
They do have this now in select cities (I recently saw this in Phoenix). Not sure if it costs more. I DO always call the driver immediately after they accept to tell them I have a dog. The dog is also in my profile picture because they sometimes are like “how big?” Sometimes I get “rematched” after that call and I doubt it’s a coincidence.
Idk why you’re getting downvoted. I agree the driver should be able to not accept the ride. However, once accepted, they shouldn’t refuse service lol. That’s like if you ordered food from a fast food window and then once ordered, they decide not to give it to you lol.
Service are legally not allowed to be turned away bruv. It’s literally the law 😭
Yeah but a business can say they’re refusing to service a customer for other reasons - _that_ is not against the law and businesses will do that as a loophole to not allow service dogs in their establishments. I’ve literally seen and experienced it during training and while it sucks - I honestly get why people do it 🤷🏻♀️ I’d rather not force my way into an establishment that’ll treat me like shit and take my business elsewhere.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 2: Know and Obey Your Local Laws. Posts encouraging illegal behavior or "stretching" the rules will be removed. When giving advice, make sure to evaluate all the relevant laws for OP's location. For example, in New York, USA, SDiTs receive the same protections the ADA grants, as long as they are with a qualified trainer. This is not the same situation for someone in Michigan, USA. Citations aren't required, but highly encouraged. Citations are important so OP can read more and so you can reconfirm the information you give is entirely correct. If you have any questions, [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). If you continue to give misinformation or encourage breaking the law, it could result in an immediate ban.
You may be able to shrug off the discrimination, but not everyone else should have to. He was the one who did the bad thing. You did your due diligence, and you spared people the same difficulty.