Minnesota settlement aims to keep service dogs on rides with Lyft
Lyft will ensure blind and other disabled passengers can travel with their service animals under a settlement announced in Minnesota, according to the Associated Press. The agreement is intended to extend across the United States, with changes that include updated driver training and Lyft app updates.
The dispute began with complaints by college student Tori Andres, who turned to the Minnesota Department of Human Rights after several Lyft drivers refused to let her service dog, Alfred, ride along with her. The state agency investigated and determined that Lyft was violating the state’s Human Rights Act, the AP reported. The parties then negotiated a settlement.
Andres spoke at a news conference with her black Labrador, where she said, “He is my eyes. He is my freedom, and he is why I am able to live independently.”
Minnesota Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said the terms require Lyft to train drivers on the rights of passengers with disabilities. Lucero also said the settlement includes warnings that drivers could be “deactivated” and lose their ability to drive for Lyft if they violate the law, and that drivers cannot cancel or refuse a ride because a passenger has a service animal or wheelchair or because the passenger has low or no vision.
Lucero said the state will monitor Lyft’s compliance for three years and that Andres will receive a $63,000 monetary settlement. “We expect that all riders in Minnesota and in fact, across the United States, will benefit from these changes,” Lucero said.
App changes and in-app warnings for refusals
The settlement also focuses on Lyft’s technology and how the company’s app will handle disclosure and reporting. The Minnesota Department of Human Rights said Lyft agreed to allow riders to update their accessibility settings to notify a driver that they’re traveling with a service animal, and to report if they’re denied service.
The state said Lyft agreed to follow up on every report it receives of driver refusals. Lucero said that if a driver tries to cancel or refuse a ride after the passenger discloses a service animal in the app, the driver will receive an in-app message stating, “It’s against the law to refuse service animals,” along with a warning that they risk getting fired.
Lyft disputes the need for policy changes
Lyft downplayed the significance of the settlement, saying in a statement that it did not agree to any policy changes because it believed the relief the state sought was already in place. Lyft also disputed that it violated the law, saying that any alleged violations were by independent drivers.
In its statement, Lyft said, “Discrimination has no place in the Lyft community,” and said it has maintained a strict service animal policy for nearly a decade. The company said independent drivers who violate that policy face serious consequences, including permanent deactivation, according to the AP report.
Uber not named in the settlement, but facing separate legal scrutiny
Lucero said the Minnesota settlement with Lyft was reached without resorting to a lawsuit. She said Uber, Lyft’s leading competitor, is not a party to the settlement, but that the Minnesota Human Rights Act binds all ride-share companies, including Uber.
Lucero said her agency frequently receives complaints against a variety of transportation companies, but she did not indicate that anything is currently in the works against Uber.
The AP reported that Uber officials did not immediately respond to a request for details on their service-animal policies. Uber’s website says service animals must be accommodated in compliance with applicable accessibility laws and with the company’s service animal policy, the AP said.
Separately, the federal government filed a lawsuit against Uber in San Francisco last September alleging Uber routinely refused to serve individuals with disabilities, including those with service dogs. The AP reported that a federal magistrate judge last week denied a company motion to dismiss the case.
Lucero said, “Access to ride shares like Lyft is not a convenience. It is, in fact, a civil right.”