In follow up to the National Federation of the Blind Rideshare Rally, President Mark Riccobono sent the following correspondence on October 31, 2024, to Uber regarding the implementation of self-identification.

Dear Mr. Byrne: 

In our discussions with Uber during the past two years about the ongoing discrimination our members face when Uber drivers continue to deny them transportation based on their use of a guide dog service animal, we made several suggestions for how Uber could reduce such denials, and reduce the burden placed on riders in reporting denials. Among those, we suggested Uber provide an option for riders to save their use of a service animal in their profile/preferences and have the Uber platform inform drivers about those riders’ use of a service animal, alongside a reminder that the law and Uber policy require all drivers to transport riders with their service animals. We suggested the Uber system automatically suspend drivers who cancel rides after being informed that the rider uses a service animal, and automatically submit a denial complaint with the information about the denied rider, the denying driver, and other details necessary for an investigation that would result in the permanent deactivation of the denying driver.

We suggested the self-identification option in the belief that, even if some riders who use guide dogs choose not to use the option, they would benefit because the riders who do choose to use the option would help to more quickly identify and remove denying drivers, which would benefit everyone. That belief was and is premised on self-identification only identifying service-animal using riders to drivers after they are paired.

When Uber representatives informed us in late 2023 that they were planning to implement self-identification, in a way that would identify riders with service animals on the offer card presented to drivers before pairing, we indicated in the strongest terms that we and our members would not accept or support such a system, as it would enable drivers to choose not to pair with riders who use service animals, and effectively shield those drivers from the consequences of their discrimination against such riders. We left that conversation believing that Uber understood the importance of only identifying riders with service animals to drivers after pairing.

Unfortunately, we learned last week that Uber intends to offer a default choice in the self-identification option to inform drivers of a rider’s service animal on the offer card prior to pairing. Providing this option, whether it is the rider’s choice or not, is unlawful. We will not support or condone such an option, and will publicly denounce Uber’s use of it and tolerance of the discrimination it fosters.

Simply put, offering an option to disclose use of a service animal prior to pairing is unlawful.

The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits Uber from discriminating against riders “on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment” of Uber’s services (42 U.S.C. §§ 12182(a) and 12184(a)). Uber may not “directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize ... criteria or methods of administration that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability; or that perpetuate the discrimination of others who are subject to common administrative control” (42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(D)). It may not apply “eligibility criteria that screen out or tend to screen out an individual with a disability or any class of individuals with disabilities from fully and equally enjoying” Uber’s services (42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(i) and 12184(b)(1)). Finally, it must “make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford” Uber’s services to riders with disabilities (42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii) and 12184(b)(2)(A)).

By offering an option for riders to disclose their use of a service animal on the offer card prior to pairing with a driver, Uber uses a criteria or method of administration that has the effect of discrimination by providing drivers with an option to undetectably refuse to transport an identifying rider with a service animal. It also perpetuates the pervasive discrimination by drivers who deny riders with service animals, whether they use self-identification or not, because it does not in any way reduce the number of drivers on the Uber platform who refuse to transport riders with service animals. Rather, it allows them to do so with impunity. In contrast, identifying riders with service animals after pairing can result in the discipline and removal of drivers who discriminate, redounding to the benefit of all riders with service animals whether they self-identify or not.

Offering an option for riders to disclose their use of a service animal on the offer card prior to pairing with a driver also presents an eligibility criteria for driver pairing that screens out or tends to screen out riders with disabilities who use service animals from pairing with otherwise-eligible drivers who undetectably and unlawfully choose not to accept those riders. Uber must therefore modify its practice or procedure for self-identification to disclose riders’ use of service animals only after pairing so that driver-discrimination against those riders is weeded out.

We hope Uber will consider this and our prior statements about how self-identification must function and never identify a rider’s disability or use of a service animal until after they are paired with a driver.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Riccobono, President
National Federation of the Blind 
200 East Wells Street, Baltimore, MD 21230
(410) 659-9314 | [email protected]
Please engage with me through Riccobono Personal AI
Mastodon: @[email protected]
Pronouns: he, him, his