Why the disabled are suing Uber and LyftRide hailing services Uber and Lyft are on the same side for once: They both deny accusations they discriminate against disabled passengers.The two companies are named as defendants in a smattering lawsuits from California to Texas alleging they violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to make their cars handicapped accessible. In some courts, Uber and Lyft are even named as co-defendants in a single case—putting the rivals, awkwardly, in the same boat.The complaints paint the car service companies—or at least their drivers—as callous to the disabled. One lawsuit by the National Federation of the Blind of California, for example, says an UberX driver stuffed a blind passenger’s guide dog in the trunk, and refused to stop the car to let the animal out. Other drivers allegedly refused to pick up blind customers accompanied by dogs.Another physically disabled woman, Jennifer McPhail of Austin, says in a lawsuit that a Lyft driver left her on the curb because her wheelchair couldn't fit in the car.
The driver then failed to provide alternative transportation.Meanwhile, other disabled app users are airing their own grievances outside of court. Kristen Parisi, 30-year-old Boston woman who uses a wheelchair, told The Daily Beast that an Uber driver refused to pack her chair into the trunk, for example. So Parisi had to maneuver herself and the chair into the back seat with no assistance, while the driver berated her as an “invalid.”Uber denies any responsibility by saying it doesn’t discriminate against the disabled and that it can transport blind and wheelchair-bound passengers. It told The Daily Beast that drivers accused of discrimination are usually suspended or fired. Lyft has a similar policy:It is Lyft’s policy that passengers that use wheelchairs that can safely and securely fit in the trunk of the vehicle or backseat of the car without obstructing the view of the driver should be reasonably accommodated by drivers on the Lyft platform, and drivers should make every reasonable effort to transport the passenger and his or her wheelchair.
Lyft says it is also willing to accommodate service animals. But it recommends that passengers who need them call the driver in advance and let them know--and has a hotline for drivers to call if they have a "medically documented reason" that would prevent them from taking the animal.Still, the heart of Uber’s defense against the discrimination allegations could not only define its identity as a firm, but set a new precedent for how it and other disruptive tech-based businesses are viewed in the eyes of the law.Uber argues that as a technology company, it is not subject to laws regulating public transit and other transportation providers, such as the ADA, or “required to provide accessible vehicles or accommodations.”Still, the U.S. Justice Department recently intervened in the blind plaintiffs’ case to urge that the discrimination accusations be taken seriously. It also requested that the court interpret whether the laws governing other transportation providers should apply to Uber as well.
A decision against Uber could be costly to it and other upstart tech firms that may find themselves classified as belonging to a more traditional industry.In a Texas case, Uber has already indicated that the cost of making the necessary modifications would be "extraordinary." The plaintiff in that lawsuit said a driver refused him service and that he could not order an accessible vehicle through the app.“It would have to modify the Uber App, modify its policies and procedures, and provide wheelchair accessible vehicles in numerous cities,” according to an October court filing.Indeed, Uber has recently added the ability to order a wheelchair-accessible vehicle using its app in certain major cities like New York and San Francisco. But it's unclear if or when the option will be available elsewhere.In the meantime, Eric Lipp, executive director of the Open Doors Organization, which advocates for accessible transportation for disabled passengers, offered this advice in The Daily Beast:“I think that many in the community do not understand that Uber has nothing against access and the ADA,” says Lipp. “
The big problem is that until the courts settle whether Uber is a software company or transportation company the disability community will just have to be patient and try to work with Uber, not against them.”Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly spelled the name of Ms Parisi. Fortune regrets the error.The second largest city in New England provides the fewest number of wheelchair-accessible taxis for its residents. With a population of roughly 185,000 people, Worcester falls far behind other cities in the region, even those with much smaller populations, when it comes to having wheelchair-accessible taxis at its disposal. The City of Worcester even admits that 25% of the population is disabled. The city of Boston has over 100 wheelchair-accessible taxis. Hartford has more than 70 and Providence has 13. The small city of Cambridge has eight wheelchair-accessible taxis. “Red Cab is the only cab company that has two accessible taxis. For the whole city.
Half of the time both of these cabs aren’t working. And then they let people take these cabs home with them,” said Robert Bilotta of Worcester, who was recently appointed to Worcester's Disability Commission. Although Worcester Green Cab offers wheelchair accessible vehicles on their website, they don't, in fact, have any in their fleet. When GoLocalWorcester called to ask them about it, the person on the phone said, "We don't have any of those. You're thinking of Red Cab." The taxi system in Worcester is monitored by the Worcester Police Department and regulated by the city's municipal government. According to the city's , "All taxi vehicles require the ownership of a medallion. The medallion authorizes specific operational practices such as picking up a fare that hails a taxicab on any public street or standing in a designated taxi stand." The medallions aren't cheap. Medallions are a certificate of public necessity and convenience (CPNC) and owners of cab companies need to purchase these from the city in order to sell them to drivers/owners.
Medallions can cost upwards of $50,000 in the city ($700,000 in Boston). "These companies won't pay for the medallions. They just won't do it," said Bilotta. In Cambridge, the city offered companies a free medallion to add a wheelchair-accessible vehicle (WAV) to their fleet if the company paid to convert an existing vehicle to a WAV. No taxi companies participated, but Cambridge managed to allow these companies to apply for a medallion to operate a WAV, and ended up awarding four medallions. For the above cities, the accessible taxi service is available 24/7. In Worcester, the Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) does provide wheelchair accessible transportation, but it is a shared ride service and only operates during the same days and times, and in the same areas, as the WRTA bus route. The WRTA service is called the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit Service. This service operates within the requirements of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations.
In order to access this service, individuals must apply and be approved as eligible under the ADA's guidelines. The ADA service works in 3/4 mile from the regular bus route and ceases operation at 11:30 PM on weekdays and 9 PM on weekends. Bilotta, who uses a wheelchair, believes the ADA service is inconvenient for people his age that like to stay out later than 9 PM. “When it comes to ADA stuff, it’s not so much discrimination. You have to be recognized first to even be discriminated against," said Bilotta. "I've been stranded and waiting for hours on some nights because the ADA service has stopped and the taxi service is either down, occupied, or the driver has already gone home." The ride-sharing service Uber has been in Worcester for nearly a year now, but provides little to no services to the disabled. In fact, Uber, and fellow ride-sharing service Lyft, are being sued for discrimination across the country. In one case, Uber's defense even states "Uber is not required to provide accessible vehicles or accommodations."
This comes even when Uber and Lyft are pushing to be recognized as legitimate transportation services. In September 2014, Uber announced its WAV (Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle) service in Philadelphia. At its announcement, Uber wrote on its website "Historically, transportation options throughout Philadelphia have been severely limited for people with disabilities. There are 1,600 taxi medallions that support a city of 1.5 million people. Of these, only seven are wheelchair-accessible." "I bet that service hasn't come here yet because there isn't enough of a demand. Plus, the taxi companies are cry babies and run to city hall every time competition comes to town. They did that when the livery cars came in a few years back," said Bilotta. Like Philly, Worcester has a drastically low amount of these vehicles for a large population. A spokesperson for Uber told GoLocalWorcester, "I can tell you that we're continuing to explore options in the Worcester area and finding ways to make Uber more accessible to everyone."