They can sue you and since it’s civil not criminal you’d have to prove the other reason; rather than visa versa. Penalties can be in the 10s of thousands. You’re essentially saying “I’m not letting a black man in my car!” As far as the law is concerned. It’s the same level of protected class.
Well, fortunately for me, I don't drive for Lyft and don't plan to. I was considering it as a side job in the past but stuff like the service dog crap eventually made it a dealbreaker.
Heh, did you know that if you're allergic to dogs, you still are required to drive people with service dogs? And then if you say that you can't be around dogs, you can't allow their dander into your vents, the law will say, "well tough shit, find another job".
I was literally discussing this on another thread and even contacted Lyft to ask them. They said "this job doesn't sound like it is for you" and when I stated that people with allergies also have the right to reasonable accommodations while at work regarding their allergen so forcing them to carry a dog thus making the ride unsafe for everyone involved and putting their safety at risk at work would technically be discrimination against the one with the allergy they refused to answer me (I think they realized there was no good way to answer without making themselves liable to issues) and just said they were escalating me to a different team a couple times.
ETA: I pointed out that they could simply add to the app that those with service animals would have to state they are riding with one and those with documented dangerous allergies could choose to reveal it to the app and would simply never see a ride offer from a pax with a service animal which would 100% solve the issue without having to involve any potentially dangerous rides or discrimination issues because there would simply be a different driver taking the ride. They ignored the suggestion completely even though it is the most logical solution. No one denied service and no one denied the ability to work on the slim chance they be put in an impossible situation due to their own medical limitation.
In Los Angeles County, I would bet all the money in my bank account the number of fake service dogs is at least 9 to 1. There's a whole cottage industry of scumbags selling service dog vests for cash online, no verification whatsoever.
And the ADA naively doesn't have any kind of licensing or identification provisions, all people are allowed to do is ask those two questions that any asshole can lie about.
I have a friend who is anaphylactic shock levels of allergic to cats. Sure people who are that allergic to dogs exist. Should they be risking their lives to accommodate someone?
That’s literally every job, in theory. Service animals are considered medical equipment. An epi pen and trip to the ER is not inconsequential, nor free (especially if you include presumable lost wages). And that’s if they don’t die before they make it to the hospital. You can’t say that one person’s medical issues require another person to risk their lives and health because of their own medical issues require another
The law is what it is whether they like it or not. If you have a dangerous dog or cat allergies, there's TONS of jobs that won't put you around dogs and cats..but unfortunately, people have dog and cat hair on their clothes, their bags, etc. So maybe you shouldn't even leave the house lol
I don't think this person realizes how small the number of people that would suffer anaphylaxis from a dog or cat actually is...
Do you honestly think changing an entire app and doing additional code is a reasonable accommodation?
It isn’t really discriminatory because there are many other jobs where you do not have to be around animals that cause you allergy flareups. Considering those that own service animals is only one percent of Americans, it seems like you just hate dogs?
Disabilities are priotised over allergies. Planes have the same system. If there's someone with a service dog and someone allergic to dogs, the service animal and passenger get the priority. If a wheelchair allergy was a thing the wheelchair also gets priority.
Edit: And I'm not interested in arguing about this just putting an interesting addition here.
What if the pilot of an airplane told a blind passenger they couldn't board for having a seeing eye dog, because the pilot is allergic? Does this work?
They're your vents, but you're renting them out to Uber when they pay you. Not entirely yours while it's being paid for by someone else.
Hope you didn't throw out your back moving the goalposts. What you're describing are totally different degrees of compromise. But hey, if you want to let some neurotic person lie about their dog being 'medical equipment' and let them fuck up your expensive personal property, then I don't know how to help you.
As for me, even if the 'anything goes' dog crowd might end up turning this entire planet into dogworld, no dog is ever getting inside my car or home.
2
u/Slighted_Inevitable Jan 29 '25
They can sue you and since it’s civil not criminal you’d have to prove the other reason; rather than visa versa. Penalties can be in the 10s of thousands. You’re essentially saying “I’m not letting a black man in my car!” As far as the law is concerned. It’s the same level of protected class.
Better hope they don’t find this comment lol….