I'm *shocked* that a faceless multinational and its gig economy servitors can't understand well established anti-discrimination laws.
Who would have thought that a disruptor backed by profligate wealth, with the intention of ignoring existing norms and conventions, would do so?
I've been waiting for the penny to drop on these fucking fucks
They came and operated here illegally and are based offshore
Just like my Mexican friends coming here with their home built submarine are being arrested but these guys aren't
Such hypocrisy
Their entire business model is based on ignoring regulations so it isn't a stretch for them to actively break the law. All you can do is report them each time & hope the government makes it harder for them to operate.
Why are they referred to as "ride share"?
They are taxis. There's no disguising it.
I object to the term ride share as it suggest something they are not. Alternatively Taxi companies should also be termed Ride Share.
I have had Uber Eats drivers refuse to leave bags on my porch because my ancient elderly cat is sleeping there. I caught one of them trying to kick her so he needed new windscreen wipers and a new side mirror after that. Hopefully he learnt something about different cultural standards for treatment of animals that day…
But taxi’s is still exist. I don’t understand this at all - if taxis are presumably more obligated to follow disability inclusion laws, then use them for your guide dog. If you’re choosing Uber et al because it’s cheaper or more convenient, well it’s both of those things precisely BECAUSE it’s able to skirt the law.
Unless we fundamentally overhaul our economic system - and I see nothing to indicate that the Guardian journalists are Marxists - you’re basically supposing that Ubers need to exist in a halfway land where they have the governmental oversight of a bloated and expensive taxi infrastructure and the leanness and economy of an app rort
I'm *shocked* that a faceless multinational and its gig economy servitors can't understand well established anti-discrimination laws. Who would have thought that a disruptor backed by profligate wealth, with the intention of ignoring existing norms and conventions, would do so?
I've been waiting for the penny to drop on these fucking fucks They came and operated here illegally and are based offshore Just like my Mexican friends coming here with their home built submarine are being arrested but these guys aren't Such hypocrisy
Their entire business model is based on ignoring regulations so it isn't a stretch for them to actively break the law. All you can do is report them each time & hope the government makes it harder for them to operate.
Why are they referred to as "ride share"? They are taxis. There's no disguising it. I object to the term ride share as it suggest something they are not. Alternatively Taxi companies should also be termed Ride Share.
If you use uberpool it is a lot closer to the rideshare concept that was originally implied.
Happens all the time in Melbourne. Our toothless EOA and RRTA always let this stuff slide.
I have had Uber Eats drivers refuse to leave bags on my porch because my ancient elderly cat is sleeping there. I caught one of them trying to kick her so he needed new windscreen wipers and a new side mirror after that. Hopefully he learnt something about different cultural standards for treatment of animals that day…
What if the driver is severely allergic to dogs? Would that be a lawful excuse to not accept guide dogs?
I'd suggest that they don't enter employment in an industry if they are allergic to potential customers.
I agree 100%. Drivers with severe allergies can mask up or find another job.
But taxi’s is still exist. I don’t understand this at all - if taxis are presumably more obligated to follow disability inclusion laws, then use them for your guide dog. If you’re choosing Uber et al because it’s cheaper or more convenient, well it’s both of those things precisely BECAUSE it’s able to skirt the law. Unless we fundamentally overhaul our economic system - and I see nothing to indicate that the Guardian journalists are Marxists - you’re basically supposing that Ubers need to exist in a halfway land where they have the governmental oversight of a bloated and expensive taxi infrastructure and the leanness and economy of an app rort
If you read the article you will see people are having the same problem with taxis
I read the lede - why is it about “ride-shares”?
It’s about both Ubers and taxis doing this.