The percentage of dog owners in the population is high enough that someone with genuinely debilitating allergies to dogs isn't safe to have a public driving job *at all*, because you can't tell if someone has dog hair or dander on their clothing when you pick them up
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @RosecransRich and
Which sucks a lot for people with debilitating allergies but is not a justification for singling out disabled people with service animals like they're somehow the problem
2 replies 1 retweet 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @RosecransRich and
So fuck people with severe allergies (drivers AND subsequent passengers) - they can find alternate employment and transportation. Do you hear yourself? There needs to be reasonable accommodation for all.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DeedsWylie @RosecransRich and
We've decided that "reasonable accommodation" means giving disabled people with service animals - who are a small percentage of animal owners - an absolute right to exist in public spaces Because, for better or for worse, public spaces already have animal hair in them
1 reply 2 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DeedsWylie and
If you genuinely think that's unreasonable, then start by banning people from owning dogs as pets, who were and are the real problem for people with truly debilitating dog allergies Let me know how it goes
2 replies 2 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @DeedsWylie and
I don't think this person has heard of conflicting accessibility needs tbh. Like in order for a room to be fully accessible to me, it needs to be a temperature many other chronically ill people would faint in.
1 reply 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @twitchyspoonie @arthur_affect and
I'm very well aware of the conflict between accessibility needs. I'm asking Uber, Lyft, et al, to sort this out so that people with service animals AND those with severe allergies to animals, etc., can both use their services.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DeedsWylie @twitchyspoonie and
Not a single actual case that I've ever seen brought up has anything to do with allergies
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @twitchyspoonie and
Do you post just for the sake of arguing? It's exhausting... So we have to wait for that to be the case before we deal with it? I'm asking to push back on the companies that prey on precarious workers & do everything in their power to avoid any responsibility for their product.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DeedsWylie @twitchyspoonie and
I'm struggling to see what exactly you think Uber should be doing differently that specifically applies to this guy not wanting to pick up a disabled person when he unambiguously legally has to
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
What I'm seeing is a lot of condescending suggestions that Uber should make a special list of drivers willing to pick up disabled people Which would, in this case, be unambiguously illegal
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @twitchyspoonie and
Or... and I'm just spitballing here... provide these drivers with: 1. proper training 2. covers for seats, cleaning supplies, etc. Y'know, the type of thing that real employers should do if they're not hiding behind the "independent contractors" excuse, whist paying nothing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DeedsWylie @twitchyspoonie and
Hey, in this particular situation she had a cover for the seat and cleaning supplies with her and texted the driver ahead of time to try to work with him, because she was taking responsibility for trying to minimize the risk of getting left (which she shouldn't have to)
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.