3 ms·

The knee jerk reaction is to defend the rights of the disabled (blind people in this case) but I'd like to ask if there's any fair argument to be made for the d

by jasode 12y ago

The knee jerk reaction is to defend the rights of the disabled (blind people in this case) but I'd like to ask if there's any fair argument to be made for the drivers at all? For example, if an Uber driver has dog allergies[1], should blind service dogs override that? Should the blind person's right to mobility trump the driver's discomfort? The discomfort could also continue (shedding, dander) after the blind passenger has left the car. Would it be ok if Uber had an option for driver profiles for drivers to check "I have dog allergies." ? I'd anticipate the reaction to be "we shouldn't allow Uber to legally offer that option because every driver would check it to keep dogs out of their cars". I'm not sure if that would be true. Wouldn't there be a good percentage of drivers who would love to welcome dogs into their cars? I don't know. I'm not an Uber driver so I don't have any vested interest either way. Just curious what people think. Also, let's compare the situation to renting apartments or housing. It is illegal to disallow service dogs even if the landlord has a "no pets" policy. The law allows for the disabled have an exemption from such policies. But, the landlords also have an exemption from that exemption if the housing is owner-occupied.[2] In other words, the landlord can't prevent the service dog from living at the rental condo out on the beach but the landlord can prevent the dog from moving into an upstairs loft in his house. Presumably, most Uber drivers are driving their personal cars and not rotating the driving among a fleet of rental cars from the taxi corporation. Is there a parallel between renting owner-occupied housing and driving a personal car for money? Is there a parallel between Uber-to-personal_car and Airbnb-to-residential-home? Consider that a car is a much more intimate space than a house. [1] http://www.webmd.com/allergies/guide/dog-allergies http://www.webmd.com/allergies/guide/dog-allergies [2] https://www.airbnb.com/support/article/898?topic=273 https://www.airbnb.com/support/article/898?topic=273

LordKano 12y ago
I was just thinking this. I am allergic to animal dander. I can't be around cats, dogs or rabbits and the like without sneezing, wheezing and coughing. Why should someone else's disability take precedence over mine? Yes, I'm sure that some drivers would falsely claim to have an allergy just to keep animals out of their cars but some passengers would also lie about their pets being service animals just to get them in the vehicles.
- scarmig 12y ago
  This applies to everything, though: could an employee in a McDonald's sue for it being an unsafe workplace in that it provides access to service animals, even if the employee has a violent reaction to animal dander? I don't know the exact reason why (I'd guess, "you can choose not to work there," but who knows), but certainly not.
  - LordKano 12y ago
    An employee could sue if McDonald's refused to provide reasonable accommodation for their allergy. Additionally, there's a world of difference between a 1500 square foot fast food restaurant and the interior of one's vehicle.
- dfxm12 12y ago
  Can you drive safely while sneezing, wheezing and coughing?
DanBC 12y ago
Transporting people, including their service animals if needed, is an intrinsic function of the job. A reasonable adjustmet might be for drivers with allergies to i) get shots and desensitization treatments ii) carry disposable dust sheets to cover the seats when transporting dogs iii) explain before taking a booking that they have a diagnosed allergy and that they cannot transport animals. I don't know how prevalent allergies are. How many of these drivers have allergies? How many of them just don't like dogs? EDIT: just thought if I have had a dandery dusty smelly dog who has been sitting on my lap all morning and I then get in the car am I going to set off an allergy?
- jasode 12y ago
  >Transporting people, including their service animals if needed, __is__ an intrinsic function of the job. I understand your statement but to clarify, my open question was about whether it __should__ be an intrinsic function of the job. Should a person's personal car be compelled to accept service dogs with no restrictions? I assume your answer would be yes. I then ask, __should__ personal homes that have a spare bedroom to rent be also compelled to accept service dogs? At the moment, personal residences are exempt from FHA & ADA laws favoring service dogs but let's not talk about what the law __is__ -- we already know what it is. Instead, to entertain the hypothetical, the question is __should__ homeowners be compelled to the same standard as drivers? If the restrictions/freedoms for a personal car and a personal home __should__ be different, the question could then be... why?
  - DanBC 12y ago
    Partly the difference is one of time. Someone living in your he could make you suffer for many months, even years. A car ride is at most a day. The other is analogous to common carrier or net neutrality. Earning money from passengers is a privilege that society grants some drivers, and one of the things society demnds in return is that the drivers do not discriminate based on protected characteristics. On one hand I see some drivers with medical condition that makes it harder for them to have dogs in their cars. On the other hand I see a group that faces continuing discrimination and ignorance from wide sections of society. I find it hard to have much sympathy for drivers. Especially in the cases listed in the article where it's not clear whether any of the drivers have dog allergies or not.
ndarilek 12y ago
What we were taught as guide dog owners is that many dog allergies are to dander, and that you as an owner are responsible for brushing your dogs regularly to minimize the effect of your dogs on those with allergies. Owning a guide dog is as much about minimizing your impact on those around you, as it is about those around you minimizing their impact on you (by, for instance, not discriminating against you.) That said, I understand the overoccupied argument and support it. As a former guide dog user, I wouldn't have wanted to live with someone with dog allergies. But if you drive an Uber vehicle then you should be prepared to handle adverse situations. I imagine giving a dog a lift from points A to B is a lot less adverse than, say, giving a drunk person a free ride and hoping they don't vomit all over your interior. :)

by jasode 12y ago

LordKano 12y ago

I was just thinking this. I am allergic to animal dander. I can't be around cats, dogs or rabbits and the like without sneezing, wheezing and coughing. Why should someone else's disability take precedence over mine? Yes, I'm sure that some drivers would falsely claim to have an allergy just to keep animals out of their cars but some passengers would also lie about their pets being service animals just to get them in the vehicles.

scarmig 12y ago
This applies to everything, though: could an employee in a McDonald's sue for it being an unsafe workplace in that it provides access to service animals, even if the employee has a violent reaction to animal dander? I don't know the exact reason why (I'd guess, "you can choose not to work there," but who knows), but certainly not.
- LordKano 12y ago
  An employee could sue if McDonald's refused to provide reasonable accommodation for their allergy. Additionally, there's a world of difference between a 1500 square foot fast food restaurant and the interior of one's vehicle.
dfxm12 12y ago
Can you drive safely while sneezing, wheezing and coughing?

DanBC 12y ago

Transporting people, including their service animals if needed, is an intrinsic function of the job. A reasonable adjustmet might be for drivers with allergies to i) get shots and desensitization treatments ii) carry disposable dust sheets to cover the seats when transporting dogs iii) explain before taking a booking that they have a diagnosed allergy and that they cannot transport animals. I don't know how prevalent allergies are. How many of these drivers have allergies? How many of them just don't like dogs? EDIT: just thought if I have had a dandery dusty smelly dog who has been sitting on my lap all morning and I then get in the car am I going to set off an allergy?

jasode 12y ago
>Transporting people, including their service animals if needed, __is__ an intrinsic function of the job. I understand your statement but to clarify, my open question was about whether it __should__ be an intrinsic function of the job. Should a person's personal car be compelled to accept service dogs with no restrictions? I assume your answer would be yes. I then ask, __should__ personal homes that have a spare bedroom to rent be also compelled to accept service dogs? At the moment, personal residences are exempt from FHA & ADA laws favoring service dogs but let's not talk about what the law __is__ -- we already know what it is. Instead, to entertain the hypothetical, the question is __should__ homeowners be compelled to the same standard as drivers? If the restrictions/freedoms for a personal car and a personal home __should__ be different, the question could then be... why?
- DanBC 12y ago
  Partly the difference is one of time. Someone living in your he could make you suffer for many months, even years. A car ride is at most a day. The other is analogous to common carrier or net neutrality. Earning money from passengers is a privilege that society grants some drivers, and one of the things society demnds in return is that the drivers do not discriminate based on protected characteristics. On one hand I see some drivers with medical condition that makes it harder for them to have dogs in their cars. On the other hand I see a group that faces continuing discrimination and ignorance from wide sections of society. I find it hard to have much sympathy for drivers. Especially in the cases listed in the article where it's not clear whether any of the drivers have dog allergies or not.

ndarilek 12y ago

What we were taught as guide dog owners is that many dog allergies are to dander, and that you as an owner are responsible for brushing your dogs regularly to minimize the effect of your dogs on those with allergies. Owning a guide dog is as much about minimizing your impact on those around you, as it is about those around you minimizing their impact on you (by, for instance, not discriminating against you.) That said, I understand the overoccupied argument and support it. As a former guide dog user, I wouldn't have wanted to live with someone with dog allergies. But if you drive an Uber vehicle then you should be prepared to handle adverse situations. I imagine giving a dog a lift from points A to B is a lot less adverse than, say, giving a drunk person a free ride and hoping they don't vomit all over your interior. :)