3 ms·
It shouldn't matter. As they say in the article, "The bottom line is that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a guide dog should be able to go anywhere t
by TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
It shouldn't matter. As they say in the article, "The bottom line is that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a guide dog should be able to go anywhere that a blind person can go."
If the driver isn't willing to comply with the regulations, then they shouldn't broadcast their services on Uber.
- pygy_ 6y agoYou are getting downvoted for mysterious reasons, you are of course correct, and this is why the plaintif was awarded $1.1m...
- wccrawford 6y agoUber is required to provide service to that person. An individual driver is not required to. If that particular driver can't, Uber still has to provide that service for the passenger.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoThis doesn't make sense to me. If a driver isn't capable or willing to be ADA compliant, then why are they driving other people? They shouldn't be.
- wccrawford 6y agoThat's saying that people with disabilities shouldn't ever do jobs unless they can do 100% of the job. Instead, the ADA says that companies must make reasonable accomodations for the employee. In this case, it means drivers with allergies don't have to take animals in their cars. For someone with a back injury, it might mean they can stock shelves so long as items are kept under a certain weight. There are plenty of instances of people with disabilities not having to do the full job, because they can do most of the job.