
Lyft’s Response to ADA lawsuit: “We’re not a transportation company” - remote_phone
https://www.fastcompany.com/90343921/lyft-claims-its-not-a-transportation-company-to-avoid-ada-compliance
======
CodeWriter23
Interesting choice. Wonder what happens when advocacy orgs star suing
individual drivers.

------
fergbrain
So fundamentally it sounds like Lyft will need to increase how much they pay
drivers with ADA vehicles to incentivize them drive? Lyft would probably take
a consistent loss on that, right?

~~~
sterlind
The ADA grants rights to disabled people. If accessibility made pure economic
sense, the ADA wouldn't need to exist in the first place. Lyft enjoys a profit
by being allowed to operate on public roads, serving hundreds of millions of
able-bodied people. The state grants Lyft that privilege under condition that
they comply with the law, and ensure ADA accomodations for a small minority of
disabled people.

Rights are a question of whether a trade-off is worth it. A small loss center
is worth the major improvement in life for disabled people, which is why
Congress mandated the law.

~~~
fergbrain
Except that ADA has undue hardship clause ( 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(p) ) that
(among other things) requires you to take into account the “net cost of the
accommodation”.

Operating at reduced profit is one thing, but operating a loss I think would
be interesting to see how the courts decide that — especially since the law
appears to have scopes net cost to the accommodation, not overall expenses of
the company.

------
aburan28
Yeah Lyft is going to have a fun time in Federal Court

