I was recently in a wheelchair for a few weeks. Uber's ADA issues go beyond the scope of this lawsuit. Uber would consistently lie about the availability of a WAV vehicle, showing one as being nearby with low wait. Then when I would order it, either nothing was available or the wait time was completely insane. I never successfully hailed one.
>Uber would consistently lie about the availability of a WAV vehicle
Uber lies about the availability of all vehicles, I think! I live in a town where there are no Uber drivers, but if you open up the app it will show 3 available with times and prices and even let you book one! Of course it doesn't exist and they will never show up. I am not sure why they do this other then to look like they have coverage to shareholders or something.
> Therefore the court ordered that the Commission to propose a comprehensive plan that provides meaningful access to taxi services for passengers using wheelchairs. The plan must include targeted goals and standards as well as anticipated measurable results. Furthermore, until such a plan was proposed and approved by the court, all new taxi medallions sold or new street hail livery licenses or permits issued by the Commission must be for wheelchair accessible vehicles.
While this is more expensive for the taxi company to have ADA vehicles, that cost is spread out across the entirety of the customer base.
The difficulty comes with ride share that aren't licensed and displace taxi services resulting in difficulty spreading out the cost across all taxi rides... and that the ride share drivers (and companies) don't provide sufficient coverage is compared to the requirement for licensed taxis.
Sitting in a hospital with discharge set for a few hours from now and expecting to use Uber WAV to get home with a broken leg... this is a little worrying.
They do that about everything. There are consistently a dozen nearby "available" drivers in the downtown area where I live within a 5 minute drive and I don't think I've ever actually gotten one of those drivers. I also frequently need rides early in the morning/late at night because of a weird work schedule. They also prominently advertise a discount for reserving a car two hours in advance and then proceed to charge me $15 dollars more than what it costs to get a ride at the time of night normally. It is worth it, so that I know I will have a ride at that time and that they will be there when I get out of work and I don't want to wait around for 30 minutes at 4am just to go home. But don't piss on my shoes and tell me its raining.
Not sure how I feel about this. I see a similar issue in what I consider mistreatment of delivery workers. There have been delivery services and transport services for disabled/elderly for a while now. People have been replacing them with gig workers and I'm not exactly sure who to blame or feel sorry for.
A post a while ago on reddit was someone who was complaining about a doordasher who didn't want to wait and bring like multiple bags of cat litter like up 3 flights of stairs. The amount of inconsiderate abuse people have towards them (making them wait, navigate buildings) is a poor allocation of resources.
> A post a while ago on reddit was someone who was complaining about a doordasher who didn't want to wait and bring like multiple bags of cat litter like up 3 flights of stairs.
I would say that many of those who are unable to get to the store to buy cat litter are also unable to walk up three flights of stairs to pick it up.
Recently, I was recovering from surgery and was not allowed to get out of bed. The exception I made was to slowly crawl to the front door to pick up the food the dasher had left there. Often, even though the setting was set to "deliver to me", they would leave the food downstairs.
My only option then was to leave the food there to rot and hope someone steals it. This was particularly frustrating during the lockdown when restaurants would close early. By the time the bad delivery happened all restaurants in my area were closed.
Often, I was left without any options. I did cook food beforehand but sometimes even thawing food can be too much while you are recovering.
Getting the entire order reimbursed would mean that the delivery person won't get paid for the delivery at all. I did feel bad about it at first, but they could have kept their promise and brought it to me.
One option would be to allow Dashers to filter between "leave on front door" and "deliver to client". But no, I don't believe that I should feel bad for someone who lied about being able to fulfil the company's promise. Especially once it became a pattern.
I ended up ordering a lot of pizzas during that time, even if I don't particularly enjoy them. Old-school pizza delivery persons would not only deliver to my apartment's door but some would even offer to bring trash or recyclables downstairs for me.
> A post a while ago on reddit was someone who was complaining about a doordasher who didn't want to wait and bring like multiple bags of cat litter like up 3 flights of stairs. The amount of inconsiderate abuse people have towards them (making them wait, navigate buildings) is a poor allocation of resources.
This sounds like simple miscommunication what the provided service actually is. When I order a package off Amazon, it gets delivered to my doorstep. When I ordered a fridge from an online retailer, it got delivered to the exact room where I wanted it, and the delivery people helped me lift it out of the styrofoam packaging. Superficially both are package deliveries, even from the same delivery company, but they are conducted and paid very differently. But which of these two can/should I expect if I order cat food from doordash?
>"A post a while ago on reddit was someone who was complaining about a doordasher who didn't want to wait and bring like multiple bags of cat litter like up 3 flights of stairs. The amount of inconsiderate abuse people have towards them (making them wait, navigate buildings) is a poor allocation of resources."
That's literally the "work" part of the delivery job and the reason people pay for the service and tip.
As someone who held many many different delivery jobs before smart phones and turn by turn GPS, you used to also have to figure out how to "navigate streets" to actually get to the person's house too. That was actually the thinking part of the job, the rest of it was just mechanical. The idea that an expectancy to have delivery people "navigate buildings" is "inconsiderate abuse" is pretty absurd. It's equally amusing to consider the act of waiting somehow being abusive as it's a reciprocal component of any delivery experience.
The implementation of the ADA may need to be modified for modern businesses, but the underlying principle of the ADA is "humans aren't interchangeable parts." Any efficiency gains that disproportionately marginalize the disabled are anti-human, and the cost should fall on neither the customer nor the gig employee but on the business and the government.
Computers are resources. Iron ore is a resource. People aren't resources. They're people. The problem is the tech industry trying to treat people like resources.
If the delivery people are paid fairly by the delivery companies, then they will be more willing to do a good and thorough job, which includes navigating buildings.
I've been an Uber driver, and yeah, some people are awful.
But I'm also tired of getting calls from Favor delivery people telling me I have to meet them in a parking lot three miles away to collect my groceries because they're running late going to the club, and this is only a "side hustle" they do on Friday nights. If I'm paying a delivery fee, plus a tip, I expect them to complete their jobs.
I'm glad for this finding, I suppose, but the world discriminates against disabled people in many more ways than this without any obvious recourse. As just a personal example, I'm over 6 ft with 10 screws in my spine and really can't ride in the back seat of a standard sedan for more than a few minutes without being in quite a bit of pain. Ever since Uber started the "no passengers in the front seat" policy thanks to Covid, that means I can only take Uber XL, which costs more no matter what. It's even worse for air travel, since I can only travel 1st class for anything more than a local flight. Airlines are only annoying most people when they squeeze us for space to the bare minimum of an average-sized, completely healthy person, but for others, they've giving us spasms and leaving us hobbled for hours after the flight.
Instead of a seat I'd prefer padded roller beds like that commercial starship in the 5th Element (movie). Please let me relax in an isolated storage pod. Bonus if these are modular and can be loaded in the terminal then computer packed into the aircraft.
I'm glad they got a fine, but I'm concerned that a) they'll go right back to discriminating when the 2-year period mentioned is up, and b) I'm not sure requiring the user to get a waiver is the right approach. It's more PII that Uber now stores and can be used to discriminate in other ways that might not be detectable from the outside.
Could it be that they launched a feature to compensate drivers for waiting around (not getting paid as the customer only pays for on trip time) and they didn't intend to discriminate? I get that big tech companies are evil, but is the theory that they intentionally wanted to cause harm to disabled people? That doesn't seem to be supported by their actions once they were notified about the issue so it's weird to see concern about them doing it again in two years.
For customers who aren't disabled, should they be able to make drivers wait around for a long time or should they pay? If they should pay, how else would they give exemptions to disabled people? If they shouldn't pay, then why would drivers sit around not making money? It seems like it's fair to compensate those drivers for their time (most jobs work like that) and if people don't have a good reason for that, they should be paying for the time they're making that driver wait.
It's Uber. Of _course_ they will go right back to doing something unethical when the heat is off. It may not even last two years.
I really have come to believe that computer science and EE programs should include two mandatory semesters in ethics. So many of the companies in the space are laughably, comic-book-villian-level bad. People defend them because they also pay super well.
I occasionally lose my eyesight due to a neurological condition. Getting either an Uber or a Lyft while visually disabled is a bit of a crap-shoot. Half the drivers I've summoned would just give up when I asked them to honk their horn or shout so I could hear where they were parked.
"Millions" are just a minor inconvenience for either company. They'll factor it into their cost of doing business and get the next round of investors to fund it. Sadly, this kind of thing is going to go on for a while.
I stopped using Uber because their drivers kept ditching my pregnant friends.
The second they see them, they cancel and bail. Lyft was far more supportive.
Why is this company allowed to exist? I feel like things like this are an instant like [X] where the company should just be actually taken down entirely and the owners thrown in prison.
Same with extremely scammy health insurance companies like United Healthcare.
I legitimately do not understand why they are allowed to exist with blatant criminal behavior.
I've stayed away from Uber ever since their first scandal, and it keeps getting "better". How fucked up can it get? They already killed someone with their shitty "self-driving" car... now this.
The driver was watching videos on their phone instead of watching the road. They are not a good target for your sympathy, independent of whether you also hate Uber.
[+] [-] wanderr|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mhuffman|3 years ago|reply
Uber lies about the availability of all vehicles, I think! I live in a town where there are no Uber drivers, but if you open up the app it will show 3 available with times and prices and even let you book one! Of course it doesn't exist and they will never show up. I am not sure why they do this other then to look like they have coverage to shareholders or something.
[+] [-] shagie|3 years ago|reply
> Therefore the court ordered that the Commission to propose a comprehensive plan that provides meaningful access to taxi services for passengers using wheelchairs. The plan must include targeted goals and standards as well as anticipated measurable results. Furthermore, until such a plan was proposed and approved by the court, all new taxi medallions sold or new street hail livery licenses or permits issued by the Commission must be for wheelchair accessible vehicles.
Some additional information - https://drhandicap.com/insights/can-taxis-refuse-service-bas...
While this is more expensive for the taxi company to have ADA vehicles, that cost is spread out across the entirety of the customer base.
The difficulty comes with ride share that aren't licensed and displace taxi services resulting in difficulty spreading out the cost across all taxi rides... and that the ride share drivers (and companies) don't provide sufficient coverage is compared to the requirement for licensed taxis.
[+] [-] BoorishBears|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] c3534l|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bernf|3 years ago|reply
A post a while ago on reddit was someone who was complaining about a doordasher who didn't want to wait and bring like multiple bags of cat litter like up 3 flights of stairs. The amount of inconsiderate abuse people have towards them (making them wait, navigate buildings) is a poor allocation of resources.
[+] [-] Karawebnetwork|3 years ago|reply
I would say that many of those who are unable to get to the store to buy cat litter are also unable to walk up three flights of stairs to pick it up.
Recently, I was recovering from surgery and was not allowed to get out of bed. The exception I made was to slowly crawl to the front door to pick up the food the dasher had left there. Often, even though the setting was set to "deliver to me", they would leave the food downstairs.
My only option then was to leave the food there to rot and hope someone steals it. This was particularly frustrating during the lockdown when restaurants would close early. By the time the bad delivery happened all restaurants in my area were closed.
Often, I was left without any options. I did cook food beforehand but sometimes even thawing food can be too much while you are recovering.
Getting the entire order reimbursed would mean that the delivery person won't get paid for the delivery at all. I did feel bad about it at first, but they could have kept their promise and brought it to me.
One option would be to allow Dashers to filter between "leave on front door" and "deliver to client". But no, I don't believe that I should feel bad for someone who lied about being able to fulfil the company's promise. Especially once it became a pattern.
I ended up ordering a lot of pizzas during that time, even if I don't particularly enjoy them. Old-school pizza delivery persons would not only deliver to my apartment's door but some would even offer to bring trash or recyclables downstairs for me.
[+] [-] wongarsu|3 years ago|reply
This sounds like simple miscommunication what the provided service actually is. When I order a package off Amazon, it gets delivered to my doorstep. When I ordered a fridge from an online retailer, it got delivered to the exact room where I wanted it, and the delivery people helped me lift it out of the styrofoam packaging. Superficially both are package deliveries, even from the same delivery company, but they are conducted and paid very differently. But which of these two can/should I expect if I order cat food from doordash?
[+] [-] bogomipz|3 years ago|reply
That's literally the "work" part of the delivery job and the reason people pay for the service and tip. As someone who held many many different delivery jobs before smart phones and turn by turn GPS, you used to also have to figure out how to "navigate streets" to actually get to the person's house too. That was actually the thinking part of the job, the rest of it was just mechanical. The idea that an expectancy to have delivery people "navigate buildings" is "inconsiderate abuse" is pretty absurd. It's equally amusing to consider the act of waiting somehow being abusive as it's a reciprocal component of any delivery experience.
[+] [-] shadowgovt|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reaperducer|3 years ago|reply
Computers are resources. Iron ore is a resource. People aren't resources. They're people. The problem is the tech industry trying to treat people like resources.
If the delivery people are paid fairly by the delivery companies, then they will be more willing to do a good and thorough job, which includes navigating buildings.
I've been an Uber driver, and yeah, some people are awful.
But I'm also tired of getting calls from Favor delivery people telling me I have to meet them in a parking lot three miles away to collect my groceries because they're running late going to the club, and this is only a "side hustle" they do on Friday nights. If I'm paying a delivery fee, plus a tip, I expect them to complete their jobs.
[+] [-] nonameiguess|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mjevans|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thewebcount|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viscanti|3 years ago|reply
For customers who aren't disabled, should they be able to make drivers wait around for a long time or should they pay? If they should pay, how else would they give exemptions to disabled people? If they shouldn't pay, then why would drivers sit around not making money? It seems like it's fair to compensate those drivers for their time (most jobs work like that) and if people don't have a good reason for that, they should be paying for the time they're making that driver wait.
[+] [-] foobiekr|3 years ago|reply
I really have come to believe that computer science and EE programs should include two mandatory semesters in ethics. So many of the companies in the space are laughably, comic-book-villian-level bad. People defend them because they also pay super well.
[+] [-] hulitu|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] retrocryptid|3 years ago|reply
"Millions" are just a minor inconvenience for either company. They'll factor it into their cost of doing business and get the next round of investors to fund it. Sadly, this kind of thing is going to go on for a while.
[+] [-] techmba|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] saddlerustle|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dgaaaaaaaaaa|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Madmallard|3 years ago|reply
Same with extremely scammy health insurance companies like United Healthcare.
I legitimately do not understand why they are allowed to exist with blatant criminal behavior.
[+] [-] paulpauper|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rdxm|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Tepix|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paul7986|3 years ago|reply
Even after Travis they continue to be an Uber disgusting company.
https://www.wired.com/story/uber-self-driving-car-fatal-cras...
[+] [-] kibwen|3 years ago|reply
Modern times call for modern idioms: "threw them in front of the Uber".
[+] [-] bpodgursky|3 years ago|reply