[shuntress]

I don't think there was anyone signed up as a driver with Uber before the ADA existed but for the sake of argument, we can assume those people exist. Yes, I agree that they should receive government-funded training that teaches them to tolerate a service dog in their car.

Every who signs up to be an Uber driver after the signing of the ADA must be capable of transporting service dogs.

[ehmmmmmmmm]

That kind of policy means that people with PTSD from dogs who are desperate for a job will sign up and WILL experience PTSD and WILL endanger riders.

It's a shitty policy IMO.

[shuntress]

I feel like you might kind of be missing the point here...

Uber should have to deal with this systemically because it is shitty to just leave it up to the drivers.

Please note that in your example here, it is also shitty for the rider who is expecting to be driven somewhere safely.

[ehmmmmmmmm]

Yes, I agree with you, Uber should have to deal with it.

A lot of people in this thread are arguing that the driver should be forced to suck it up and I think that's shitty for both the driver's and rider's safety.

[Miner49er]

I don't see much of an other option for Uber if they want to fix this.

It's not uncommon for small towns to have one Uber driver going at certain times. Well that driver can't be the only driver around if they aren't going to take service animals. So Uber would have to tell them that they can't drive unless they are willing to take service animals or there is another driver around that is willing to.

[shuntress]

They have to make sure the service they offer complies with the ADA's requirements and where that is not possible they must not offer that service.

[selimthegrim]

Ah, a Stephen Breyer counterfactual.