Growing up with a visual impairment, and living in a town with no connections to the public transit system unless I could get someone to drive me 20 minutes to the next town over and catch a train, I always yearned for the feeling of leaving the house of my own free will. I couldn’t drive, but my friends and family could, and that really sucked. Paratransit also wasn’t an option for me, as I had to live close enough to a fixed-route system (such as a bus route or train track), and I didn’t. So I wasn’t eligible.
Fast forward to the advent of ridesharing. Apps like Lyft and Uber have been extremely valuable in providing access to transportation for those who need it, and at a fraction of the cost of taxis. Since everything is handled through a smart device—and a system in place for older individuals to call a number for someone schedule a ride for them—you’d think life would be super easy, right? Unfortunately, that’s not necessarily the case.
Uber and Lyft both have service animal policies in place. A service animal, typically a dog, is allowed in public spaces and buildings, as well as inside taxis and rideshare vehicles with their handler. Although the driver for the rideshare service is using their own car, they still have to abide by the policies set forth by the company they work for. Both Lyft and Uber hold basically the same stance:
Driver-partners have a legal obligation to provide service to riders with service animals.
Uber’s Service Animal Policy FAQ
A driver-partner CANNOT lawfully deny service to riders with service animals because of allergies, religious objections, or a generalized fear of animals.
By virtue of their written Technology Services Agreement with Uber, all driver-partners using the Driver App have been made aware of their legal obligation to provide service to riders with service animals and have agreed to comply with the law. If a driver-partner refuses to transport a rider with a service animal because of the service animal, the driver-partner is in violation of the law and is in breach of their agreement with Uber.
As an independent contractor, isn’t it my choice to accommodate service animals?
Lyft’s Service Animal Policy FAQ
We created Lyft for people who love flexibility and freedom, and that’s still the case. But even independent contractors have to follow the law. For example, it’s Lyft policy and the law that you and your riders wear a seatbelt while driving for Lyft. Similarly, it’s Lyft policy and the law that you accommodate service animals.
Even though those are the company policies, not all drivers adhere to them. I’ve never personally been denied a ride when my guide dog was working, but I’ve been with others who have, and I’ve also booked rides for friends who were denied because of their guide dog. I understand a lot of it has to do with cultural beliefs—some cultures think dogs are dirty and should be kept outside—but, in some cases, it just boils down to someone not wanting a dog in their car.
There’s a difference between a driver zooming past while seeing a service animal and canceling the ride, and a driver stopping to tell the handler they won’t take them and their dog, giving an excuse as to why, and making a show of things. I know someone in the community who was denied a ride, and their fiancé, who wasn’t a guide dog handler, attempted to talk to the driver and get in the car. The driver then sped off with the fiancé hanging on to the car, going down the street a few miles before stopping. The fiancé was then in need of a lot of stitches, but was otherwise alright.
I once booked an Uber for a friend of mine to take to my house. After explaining to the driver that they would be picking up my friend and not me, and that my friend had a guide dog, the driver said they didn’t take dogs and to cancel the ride. I was then charged a $10 cancellation fee, with funds withdrawn from my account. After contacting Uber with the driver’s details and information on the incident, as well as throwing their own policies at them regarding drivers transporting service animal teams, I was reimbursed the fee—but that was it.
I understand there would be a huge loss taken if everyone were terminated for denying a ride to a working service animal team, and I’m not advocating for termination right out of the gate. However, I do think there should be something else in the form of repercussions or accountability for the driver. What those repercussions would be, I’m not sure. I know a rider who was once told by Lyft they wouldn’t be matched with the driver who denied them again, but they also had been denied by a sizable handful of drivers due to service animal denials… and by that point, I almost wonder if were the drivers, or the rider.
Ultimately, it boils down to a lot of he-said, she said situations. Another friend of mine had a situation with Lyft recently, where they wanted to charge them an $80 “cleaning fee” because they had their guide dog in the car, and the driver alleged damages to the point that they had to take the vehicle out of service. The guide dog in question is a poodle, and the photographic evidence the driver provided showed no damages beyond the normal wear and tear of having a car—plus, the hairs on the seats were white, and the dog is black, and guide dogs are also taught to sit in the seat wells (on the floor), instead of up on the seats themselves. My friend has since filed complaints with the DOJ and an agency against discrimination, and will hopefully get to the bottom of the situation at some point. But, according to someone else I know who’s a former Lyft driver, they cannot charge service animal handlers a cleaning fee. And the damages to that particular car amounted to a lint roller from the Dollar Store, but an $80 fee.
Rideshare companies can be very helpful. They’re cost-effective, usually available in smaller towns or more rural areas where you may not find a taxi or public transit, and can get you to where you want to go relatively quickly and safely. Although there are other stories of sexual assault tied to some of Uber and Lyft’s drivers, it’s unfortunately on a driver-by-driver basis, as are the handling of service animal handlers requesting a ride. The National Federation of the Blind had a class-action lawsuit against Uber at one point that led to changes in Uber’s service animal policy, among other things. That was four years ago, and there are still denials happening. I wish there were an easy answer, but I can’t even think of one to suggest. But I do hope that things get better, somehow.