I’ve extolled the virtues of autonomous vehicles, specifically Waymo, in this column (and elsewhere) on numerous occasions. However imperfect the technology may be, I staunchly believe fully autonomous cars are the best bet Blind and low vision people have to reaching accessibility’s zenith. Companies like Waymo, not to mention Cruise, enable those of us with visual impairments the ability to assert agency and autonomy in our travel. No longer must we lay at the mercy of other people’s kindness to get around, making our needs feel burdensome to others. And while I’m a general proponent of readily available public transit, the reality is its efficacy varies from city to city; it can be hard sometimes to rely on it as one’s primary mode of transportation if you don’t have a vehicle.
What about rideshare? On one level, companies like Lyft and Uber more or less possess the same accessibility gains for Blind and low vision riders as a robotaxi. With a few taps on one’s smartphone, a person can hail a ride and go anywhere they need to go in reasonably fast fashion. This also is a topic I’ve written about in the past, as I’m a staunch believer that, on balance, Lyft and Uber contribute positively to society. Not only are they convenient, they help people who struggle with mobility get around more freely and accessibly. But there are warts—namely, cars can be hard to find, driven by unfriendly and impatient chauffeurs. I’ve had drivers cancel rides altogether because I’ve taken too long, as my low vision makes it difficult to find the right car to get into.
I recently got a message from someone who alerted me to the news there was a rally at Uber’s headquarters in downtown San Francisco to protest guide dog discrimination. Blind and low vision people lament they have been repeatedly denied service in rideshare vehicles because drivers refuse to transport their service animal. It’s a situation that runs afoul of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), but seemingly shrugged over.
My friend Candice Nguyen, an investigative reporter at San Jose-homed NBC Bay Area, covered this very topic for the station earlier this year.
It’s a situation Suzette May has found herself encountering often.
May, a 55-year-old student at Arizona State University who lives in Waco, Texas with her husband, explained to me in a recent interview via videoconference she, with her guide dog named Fred in tow, has been repeatedly denied service by rideshare drivers. As a Blind person, May uses Lyft and Uber “a lot” during her travels, especially for her work as a disability accessibility consultant. She told me she’s experienced “quite a few” denials, many of which have been “really intense.” It’s frustrating because it impedes May’s ability to get around, with her saying the situation is only worsening. Despite disability organizations organizing educational resources for drivers, nothing is working; the ADA seemingly strikes fear in no one. May became Blind later in life, at 49, due to a degenerative condition affecting her eyes that she’s coped with since birth. In the years since, she uses a cane and Fred to move about, saying rideshare is one of the ways she maintains her independence.
May attended the aforementioned rally in San Francisco last month, which was put on by the National Federation of the Blind. She reported there were 250–300 people there, including allies from various support agencies. Everyone there “had a story to tell” about being discriminated against—or knowing a loved one affected by it. As such, May said there was a lot of story-swapping as part of trying to raise awareness that day.
“We’ve experienced a lot of discrimination,” she said of the horror stories. “People have been physically threatened [and] verbally threatened. It’s traumatizing to our guide dogs… being in an argument like that, they pick up on what’s going on with the humans around them. We need to do something different. We need better education.”
May continued: “I’ve had drivers come and tell me they’re not taking my f******* dog. I’ve had drivers who sit the back of the parking lot and wait until my five minutes is up to where I get charged for being a no-show, then they’ll say, ‘I’m not taking your dog. I’m canceling your ride.’”
Kristin Smedley, co-founder of Thriving Blind Academy, told me in an interview concurrent to May’s that she didn’t encounter a Blind person until she was 28 when her firstborn son was diagnosed with Leber congenital amaurosis when he was 5 months old. Since then, she has become a staunch ally and advocate of the Blind and low vision, even giving a TED Talk in 2017 on the topic, using her son as a prism. She called society’s general treatment of Blind and low vision people “a crisis” because most sighted people sorely underestimate how capable and extraordinary those without (much) vision are in living life.
In remedying her woes and advocating for herself, May said she has continually alerted Lyft and Uber to the discriminatory practices by drivers—yet to little avail. Both companies generally punt, only refunding her money for the ride(s) along with am apology. There’s sympathy, but the only real recourse is issuing a refund to the rider.
“Discrimination has no place in the Lyft community. We strive to provide an inclusive and accessible platform for riders, including those who rely on service animals or mobility devices,” a Lyft spokesperson said in a statement provided to me when reached for comment. “We continually update our practices to improve accessibility for riders and are proud to be working directly with advocacy organizations in the community. This year, we are launching a Service Animal Opt-In feature, allowing riders to disclose that they travel with a service animal when requesting a ride. This feature is a significant step in our broader mission to ensure that riders feel safe and supported on our platform.”
Lyft’s opt-in feature enables riders like May to clearly disclose in their profile that they ride with a service animal. Drivers will see the guide dog designation only when they accept a ride, as the real-time notifications are meant to eliminate cancellations based solely on the service animal.
There’s a webpage dedicated to service animals on Lyft’s site. Of particular import is the company plainly states there are consequences for drivers who refuse riders with guide dogs, including “immediate and permanent deactivation if an investigation into the alleged denial verifies a wrongful denial.” Lyft adds drivers are expected to comply with the law; as it goes with wearing seatbelts, it also flies with service animals.
For its part, Uber has similar initiatives regarding service animals on its platform. The company requires drivers to transport disabled people and their assistive tools, including guide dogs, when they sign up to drive. Moreover, Uber sends regular reminders via email about its Service Animal and Assistive Device Policy to drivers. Under has a page dedicated to accessibility on its website, with the company announcing last month it will be rolling a program similar in scope to Lyft’s that it says empowers people to self-identify their disability in their profile.
“We want all riders with disabilities to have a safe, dignified, and positive experience when using the Uber platform to move around our communities,” an Uber spokesperson said in a statement when reached for comment. “Our policies prohibit drivers from denying service because of a rider’s service animal or assistive device, and we routinely remind drivers that this conduct is unlawful and can result in permanent deactivation. Recently, we shared with drivers a new education module regarding this policy and we announced a service animal handler self-identification pilot for riders coming this fall. We are committed to collaborating with the disability community to continue driving forward on our commitment to achieve accessibility for all on Uber.”
However scarred she is, May remains gracious. She “doesn’t want Lyft or Uber’s money” nearly as much as she wants drivers who overtly discriminate to be held accountable. If riders were denied service based on their race or sex, there would be an uproar. It’s intolerable. What’s happened to May happens to others, yet comparatively only receives a peon’s pittance of the attention and commensurate uproariousness.
“When you’re disabled, [discrimination] seems to be okay. That’s got to change,” May said. “We definitely need better education.”
For her part, Smedley agreed wholeheartedly with May’s comments. Smedley said if May were denigrated for being a woman, “the world would go crazy.” But because she’s a Blind woman, it doesn’t make much noise. Most, Smedley added, don’t relate to disability because they aren’t impacted by it—even tangentially. The disability community is the easiest to join, so people should show exponentially more empathy.
“[Disability] is going to affect you at some point,“ May said. “People need to realize this is a big deal. This is a big problem. It needs to be fixed.”
As to the future, both May and Smedley expressed optimism people will become more educated and enlightened on disability rights and adopt a no-tolerance outlook on discrimination. May wants to keep using rideshare for its obvious accessibility benefits. Smedley said it can be a “serious competitive advantage” for businesses to include people with disabilities in their decisions. Given the accessibility-oriented documentation on their respective websites, it’s appropriate to credit some contingent at Lyft and Uber for seeing the value of inclusivity.
As for Waymo, May said she used it “several times” during her time in San Francisco. She “loved” the experience and enthusiastically noted she would “totally use it all the time” if ever Waymo finds its way to Waco.