This is false Uber has tried to argue this in court but no judge has agreed with them Moreover, even if we pretend this is true, then the *driver* is the "transportation company" and still must comply with the ADA https://twitter.com/ambienvalent/status/1220104316406697984 …
-
-
Not unusually for them, Uber does nothing to make compliance easier for their drivers, which means that it can be an added cost they can ill afford. But the drivers aren't therefore justified in refusing compliance any more than the low wages justify mugging customers.
-
The definition of "reasonable accommodation" does change if physical equipment or special training is actually required But this situation required neither, and honestly if the issue is he doesn't want dog hair on his seats, I have a hard time giving a shit
- 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.