Are some Uber taxi drivers prejudiced against people with autism?

[Nitro]

I can only guess, but I know that throughout my life I annoy NTs and they barely ever tell me to my face, instead they just moan about me behind my back and show distaste towards me, sometimes even making horrid jokes when I don't know what I've done wrong, I've had it at workplaces and when I've tried to go out with people. I suspect it's the way I talk and come across which is related to autism, but not tipping also won't help the situation. If I'd tipped more often I suspect some drivers would have rated higher, the rating system makes people afraid not to tip, but if I was a bubbly NT I strongly suspect my rating would had been at least average even without tipping and probably very good if I had tipped too.

So this entire thread is based on a guess, a perception, correct?

 

[Joel's Hear]

I do not have an Uber account, but have ridden with them four times, with my family. They were called by acquaintances with Uber accounts, and I was allowed to pay in cash. I have tipped twice, but not the other times. Don't know what kind of review they gave.

I am not a big fan of Uber, often feeling in danger when riding with them. I do not know why. I did like one of the drivers well. I stick to taxis; in my area they are plentiful, friendly, and cheap.

 

[pjcnet]

I would like to mention a relevant episode of Black Mirror called "Nosedive", in this episode everyone is rated for everything by everyone, even people you walk by on the street. The episode shows what could go wrong if this system was implemented everywhere, I sincerely hope Uber isn't just the start of it and it ultimately ends up similar to this, because if so autistic people like myself are going to have a horrid time.

@Mary Anne I can understand people being rated for car sharing because they're not really customers, they are people sharing the vehicle and paying towards the cost of the journey, but the rating system is likely to be just as unfair for many people. If you are riding with Uber you are a paying customer however that is just using a taxi service and without customers the drivers wouldn't be-able to make a living, customers should not be rated in this way, if a customer does something really bad and breaks the rules, then the driver should have the right to complain to the company and the customer should also have their say in a formal procedure that is overseen with a right to appeal Etc., then proven very bad customers would be blacklisted, not customers that just don't engage in good conversation, make the driver uncomfortable due to their autistic body language and/or don't give a tip.

So this entire thread is based on a guess, a perception, correct?

Well since I haven't broken any Uber rules and I've been respectful, what else could it be? I can only guess because the rating system is one way, you can't go to the driver and ask them why they rated you badly, that's also what's bad about it, you have no say or right to argue unfair ratings or even know for definite why.

 

[Judge]

In terms of modern consumer laws it's the seller of goods and services who is largely held to account for the obvious reasons. Not the buyer.

If a buyer causes a civil wrong in the course of a service or sale of goods, the seller already has the right to pursue the matter in a civil court- as it should be. Though things like tips and being chatty hardly rise to the level of a civil wrong. Making the very notion of subjectively rating customers after-the-fact fundamentally preposterous.

It's ultimately just a means for raising the costs of fares through a disingenuous form of public shaming. If Uber wants to right their wrong, they should simply incorporate a tip into the fare, and abandon the practice of drivers being able to arbitrarily shame customers online. Make the entire process transparent with far fewer misunderstandings between both driver and customer.

 

[Nitro]

Are some Uber taxi drivers prejudiced against people with autism?

This is the thread title.
I'm sure there are some Uber drivers who are predjudiced to autistic persons,but as a rule, I would be willing to bet the farm that most of those that drive for them are unable to perform a full psychological assessment at a glance or by reading your poor Uber ratings.

 

[Judge]

Are some Uber taxi drivers prejudiced against people with autism?

This is the thread title.
I'm sure there are some Uber drivers who are prejudiced to autistic persons,but as a rule, I would be willing to bet the farm that most of those that drive for them are unable to perform a full psychological assessment at a glance or by reading your poor Uber ratings.

I suppose your question is relative to those of us who take such a title in a most literal manner. From my perspective, it's not that drivers are intended to neurologically assess much of anyone. We agree in that sense. That it could have been worded better.

HOWEVER

It's that drivers are most likely to default to their Neuroptypical perspective where they expect and/or demand that all their customers conform accordingly. Without any thought to the possibility that their customers might be Neurodiverse. To my mind, that's unfair and prejudicial. Not in terms of a tip, but rather to criticize and publicize a rider's lack of socialization for the duration of the ride. An issue which can be problematic for many people on the spectrum.

I doubt much of anyone seriously expects an Uber driver to become neurologically aware. That's obviously not practical. But my point remains that being able rate people over their ability to socialize is just plain wrong. And in truth, for them to arbitrarily rate passengers for any reason is again just plain wrong.

Make the process objective for the driver and the customer. Pay the fare, pay the tip and don't cause any property damage. And be prepared to tell a potential passenger of any rate surges before proceeding to any destination. And have no expectations of a passenger being talkative whether they're on the spectrum or not.

 

[kay]

I'm guessing here, but while an Uber driver may not know that someone is diagnosed as ASD they still pick up on that something "different". It's happened to me and I am a very quiet type but still there is just enough "off" about me to get me treated weirdly in a bad way. Depends on the group, it doesn't always happen so much, but once it was a native plants group. They all dressed alike, took notes alike, even leaned back and forward at the same times. I took no notes (don't really know how or why, it wasn't a class), most likely was stimming (that tends to be a bit odd) and was wearing what I thought was appropriate;jeans and a t-shirt with a green snake on it. Anyhoo, I was the odd one and was totally snubbed at refreshment time. None of those people knew my diagnosis but I was just too different. Even I could see how I was different but still, why snub different? Of course I am drawn to different the way a bunny is drawn to chew on a good piece of furniture. Best I have done was an atheist Meetup but even that eventually fell apart for me as people moved away and new people showed up. Being in the Bible Belt and being a non-believer means a bit more willingness to accept difference when you all get together.

 

[Mary Anne]

No, exactly, so autistic people shouldn't be judged by them and punished because they're autistic, in fact they shouldn't be judging anyone like this, if they do something clearly wrong, E.g. their very drunk and are aggressive, then that should be the only time there should ever be an issue and it should be a valid complaint that is overseen by the company where the customer also gets their say, but Uber's current system is unfair and is done entirely behind the customers back without reason or just cause. I'm a respectful paying customer and that's all, but if a driver simply doesn't like the look of me that can be a reason for giving me a bad rating and this causes extreme prejudice from other drivers who then often give you a terrible service by cancelling jobs, it's really not on. I don't go into a shop to buy something and think, I have to be extra friendly to the shop keeper and suck up to them in conversation or they will rate me down so other shops will refuse to serve me or otherwise treat me with severe prejudice. If that happened in shops you'd be frightened to even return an item if it was faulty, but similarly you are frightened to complain if a driver does something wrong or they will give you a bad rating. I have issues with my legs and am slow getting into vehicles because of it, I am probably rated down by some drivers even for this, on medical grounds, once a driver started driving off when I was half in the vehicle and I had to shout to get him to stop or I'd be injured, obviously the driver was totally out of order and would have been liable if I'd been injured, but he probably gave me a bad rating for his wrongdoing, see how unfair it is?

What is truly frustrating to me, is that you keep going on with your emotionally charged assumptions without even trying to find out the facts. Your assumptions are not based in reality. You also have not gone and tried out the suggestions given here multiple times. Nor have you answered whether you got only one bad review which skewed the percentages on the rest of the reviews. We all project our emotions into others in real life. It’s one big mirror. You projected that the world is judging you and stereotyping you, and your paranoia, frustrations, and anger spread like wildfire to others. Without any basis in fact finding. Life IS unfair to millions of people. Get used to it, and save your energy for something that will make you feel good. Something tangible. Like ice cream!

 

[Anthracite]

I'm still trying to figure out why customers get rated I'm glad I can drive, so so glad.

 

[Nitro]

That it could have been worded better.

.

Yes,it was worded rather poorly.
It focused on drivers being prejudiced towards the autistic community instead of the possibility that the Uber drivers may have felt uncomfortable with the passengers they were giving the ride to.


Do I think it is fair that they can rate you in any manner they see fit?

It is their car, and not an organization that is friendly to regulated taxi businesses who fall under strict government protocol, so if you choose to work outside of the regulations, you have done so at your own risk.


If you are shunned by Uber, their loss,not yours

 

[Judge]

Yes,it was worded rather poorly.
It focused on drivers being prejudiced towards the autistic community instead of the possibility that the Uber drivers may have felt uncomfortable with the passengers they were giving the ride to.


Do I think it is fair that they can rate you in any manner they see fit?

It is their car, and not an organization that is friendly to regulated taxi businesses who fall under strict government protocol, so if you choose to work outside of the regulations, you have done so at your own risk.


If you are shunned by Uber, their loss,not yours

Caveat Emptor- "Buyer beware".

However it's a concept that involves a consideration of a business agreement by the buyer before the fact. Not after the fact. And it doesn't matter whether a driver is under a corporate "umbrella" or not.

"No shirt, no shoes, no service". The spirit of how the law relates to private sector individual proprietors. But again, it's also not a concept that extends in any punitive way after any business agreement is negotiated.

In other words, it comes down to transparency. Which in these circumstances doesn't exist given it's arbitrary and after the fact. If a proprietor has an issue with a business transaction after the fact, they should pursue it in a civil court where the issues are adjudicated by a court rather than individuals being able to publicly and punitively malign people online.

If you have a problem with your customer, take them to small claims court. But understand that whether or not they were talkative as a passenger isn't likely to result in any monetary compensation by a judge.

Frankly I'd just simply avoid Uber like the plague with such terms and conditions, whether they fall within the law or not. Easier just to take a cab and not sweat so many things a consumer shouldn't have to sweat over to begin with.

Indeed, make it their loss and not yours. Avoidance being the best resolve.

 

[Mary Anne]

Yes,it was worded rather poorly.
It focused on drivers being prejudiced towards the autistic community instead of the possibility that the Uber drivers may have felt uncomfortable with the passengers they were giving the ride to.


Do I think it is fair that they can rate you in any manner they see fit?

It is their car, and not an organization that is friendly to regulated taxi businesses who fall under strict government protocol, so if you choose to work outside of the regulations, you have done so at your own risk.


If you are shunned by Uber, their loss,not yours

Nicely said, Nitro. I know for a fact that there are drivers that will not go into poor, or “black” or “homosexual” or (fill in the blank with whatever.) parts of town. There are drivers that won’t pick up “extremely oversized” people. There are all kinds of reasons for biases and judgements. I am sure some drivers don’t deal with diasabiltiy either too well. Whether it’s illegal to not give service is one point, but the other point is that it’s a big unfair world of horrible, abusive, blaming, judgemental, stereotyping, scary humans. Most of us cannot and will never live without being exposed to it (them) in some way. Never make assumptions without backing it up with factual research.

 

[Judge]

Nicely said, Nitro. I know for a fact that there are drivers that will not go into poor, or “black” or “homosexual” or (fill in the blank with whatever.) parts of town. There are drivers that won’t pick up “extremely oversized” people. There are all kinds of reasons for biases and judgements. I am sure some drivers don’t deal with disability either too well. Whether it’s illegal to not give service is one point, but the other point is that it’s a big unfair world of horrible, abusive, blaming, judgemental, stereotyping, scary humans. Most of us cannot and will never live without being exposed to it (them) in some way. Never make assumptions without backing it up with factual research.

I can think of an insurer which did something very similar. And got caught.

A smaller insurer who even went to the trouble of drawing maps of San Francisco of areas to avoid (called "red-lining"). Don't write the blacks in the Western Addition. Don't write the gays in the Castro. And don't write the Latinos in the Mission District. They forgot to hide the maps when routine insurance department auditors paid them a visit. Ouch. Very, very expensive fines, apart from a big black eye in public relations and marketing that lingered for years afterward. A story those same auditors told me as they were examining our books about a year later!

In this instance we're talking about a heavily regulated industry as opposed to individual operators. Sometimes karma indeed catches up with such mentalities. Though proper and reasonable regulation helps. In that respect I suspect Uber drivers' recourse may eventually be reduced legally speaking. New business concepts usually get pulled into a legislative loop sooner or later. To force them into greater transparency.

Of course there will likely always be those who choose to break laws for profit. A dynamic that never changes. Where avoidance and perhaps some bad publicity remains our best option as consumers. A better option than simply lamenting that "stuff happens".

 

[Mary Anne]

I can think of an insurer which did something very similar. And got caught.

A smaller insurer who even went to the trouble of drawing maps of San Francisco of areas to avoid (called "red-lining"). Don't write the blacks in the Western Addition. Don't write the gays in the Castro. And don't write the Latinos in the Mission District. They forgot to hide the maps when routine insurance department auditors paid them a visit. Ouch. Very, very expensive fines, apart from a big black eye in public relations and marketing that lingered for years afterward. A story those same auditors told me as they were examining our books about a year later!

In this instance we're talking about a heavily regulated industry as opposed to individual operators. Sometimes karma indeed catches up with such mentalities. Though proper and reasonable regulation helps. In that respect I suspect Uber drivers' recourse may eventually be reduced legally speaking. New business concepts usually get pulled into a legislative loop sooner or later. To force them into greater transparency.

Of course there will likely always be those who choose to break laws for profit. A dynamic that never changes. Where avoidance and perhaps some bad publicity remains our best option as consumers. A better option than simply lamenting that "stuff happens".

Yes, it happens. But on the other hand, as someone who had to drive our disabled members home from work at my last job, I did not appreciate driving in really bad violent areas where I stuck out like a sore thumb either. A co-worker was killed last month, and people routinely get shot for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I have been yelled at with racial slurs to “ go back to where I came from” and had bricks and rocks thrown at me just for being in the wrong neighborhood. I can see it both ways. Which is why Uber and lyft and taxis are not to be found in some rather noticeable large areas of Chicago.

I also have trans friends that definitely found themselves in bad situations, and were refused service. It’s illegal, but it happens. I said the world is a very cruel and unfair place.

 

[Judge]

Yes, it happens. But on the other hand, as someone who had to drive our disabled members home from work at my last job, I did not appreciate driving in really bad violent areas where I stuck out like a sore thumb either.

Neither did I when I worked as a truck driver and warehouseman for a major electrical parts company. At one point I recall being in an area (Oakland) where my skin was the wrong color, let alone my clothing "colors" which could literally get me killed only for being the wrong person in the wrong place at any time.

I was on some "turf" far beyond my control and I knew it.

The irony of it all was that on a regular basis my warehouse duties in a very safe part of the county was so dangerous to my health that I eventually quit. Go figure. They had me doing stupid things just to move very heavy equipment without the proper resources and it caught up with me being injured on the job.

 

[Mary Anne]

Neither did I when I worked as a truck driver and warehouseman for a major electrical parts company. At one point I recall being in an area (Oakland) where my skin was the wrong color, let alone my clothing "colors" which could literally get me killed only for being the wrong person in the wrong place at any time.

Yes, I know East Oakland. In Chicago, if you act weird, are of any brown or black color, there has been a tendency of police to shoot first and ask questions later. Often, people are judged and stereotyped, by the police through the US. You are stopped in your car, you are arrested for no reason, you can be routinely killed just for being a person of color! Or acting strangely, or weird, or even autistic, as happened to one 12 year old who was arrested in a park because he was not following the orders screamed at him by police. So yeah, life happens. It’s not right, but it happens every hour of the day somewhere in the US, or at least the world. Life is unfair.

 

[pjcnet]

Yes,it was worded rather poorly.
It focused on drivers being prejudiced towards the autistic community instead of the possibility that the Uber drivers may have felt uncomfortable with the passengers they were giving the ride to.


Do I think it is fair that they can rate you in any manner they see fit?

It is their car, and not an organization that is friendly to regulated taxi businesses who fall under strict government protocol, so if you choose to work outside of the regulations, you have done so at your own risk.


If you are shunned by Uber, their loss,not yours

But in my opinion many drivers are more likely to feel uncomfortable with an autistic person without proper cause, this is prejudice and they should not be making unfounded assumptions about their customers and making judgements that adversely labels them when using the service in future even when they're sticking to the rules and have done absolutely nothing wrong.

I don't know what Uber is like in the USA, but in the UK they are fully licensed private hire taxis and you as a customer have exactly the same rights as in any other private hire taxi whether it's their car or not, you are not skipping any regulations. London council have however officially decided not to renew Uber's license and they're only continuing to operate in London while waiting to go to appeal court, this is most probably because of the way they operate, the standard of drivers and because of customer complaints. If they lose in London they will no longer be-able to operate in the UK capital and I suspect it will be the end of Uber in the UK completely because other councils who license them will probably follow suit, but I suspect Uber will have a partial victory where they will be allowed to keep their license under various extra conditions which will including vetting their drivers more carefully because they're far too popular to be banned.

What is truly frustrating to me, is that you keep going on with your emotionally charged assumptions without even trying to find out the facts. Your assumptions are not based in reality. You also have not gone and tried out the suggestions given here multiple times. Nor have you answered whether you got only one bad review which skewed the percentages on the rest of the reviews. We all project our emotions into others in real life. It’s one big mirror. You projected that the world is judging you and stereotyping you, and your paranoia, frustrations, and anger spread like wildfire to others. Without any basis in fact finding. Life IS unfair to millions of people. Get used to it, and save your energy for something that will make you feel good. Something tangible. Like ice cream!

Please remember that the article was titled, "Are some Uber taxi drivers prejudiced against people with autism?" which is a question, NOT a statement, it's intended to receive comments and thoughts on the subject which has been achieved.

I wrote this article only a matter of a few hours ago and I haven't been at the computer permanently since to respond to everything, but I originally stated that I've used Uber over 100 times so the low score won't be just one driver, although I will have still received mostly 5 stars to get a 4.2 score, anything less than 5 stars is seen as bad and as I said if you score less than 4.6 on average you are seen as a problematic customer which I am most certainly NOT. It's not paranoia that Uber drivers are judging myself and other customers because that is an absolute fact, that's exactly what the personal rating is all about and it most definitely does make other drivers stereotype me as a bad person, E.g. some type of thug, that's why I'm now getting multiple cancellations before they've even turned up, while they turn up and give a faster service to people with higher ratings whether they're genuinely fair or not.

The way Uber operate is most certainly controversial and I still believe that autistic riders are more likely to be rated lower even when like myself they have stuck to all the rules as a customer, then other drivers will also look down upon them thinking that they're problematic people when it's not true. All this is in my opinion prejudice and I stick to this opinion, also I agree that life is unfair to millions, but it doesn't change this particular issue.

 

[Judge]

The way Uber operate is most certainly controversial and I still believe that autistic riders are more likely to be rated lower even when like myself they have stuck to all the rules as a customer, then other drivers will also look down upon them thinking that they're problematic people when it's not true. All this is in my opinion prejudice and I stick to this opinion, also I agree that life is unfair to millions, but it doesn't change this particular issue.

In theory I agree with such sentiments. However what remains problematic IMO is that such a defendant in a tort action is likely to claim the obvious. That they had no idea or understanding that the plaintiff was on the spectrum of autism. That they made their opinions only on the basis of appearance frightening them. The projection of a menacing or unfriendly look. Nebulous fear- not autism. Where suddenly your case of overt discrimination might fall apart given common concerns of taxi drivers. For better or worse, profiling people isn't just for the police.

Then again, if nothing happened despite some intense fears, why would they or should they deliver punitive scores along such lines after the fact? It makes no sense. It's why I emphasize any action taken to be before the fact and not after. Otherwise it may potentially compromise their testimony and their credibility. The one thing that I see that might create some legitimate legal traction relative to autism could be to press the idea of penalizing any passenger who remains silent or less than talkative. And there are any number of medical conditions to limit or refrain from someone having the ability, let alone the desire to speak.

And if the defendant chose to mention you weren't tipping them, Uber has a corporate policy stating they can't penalize a passenger's score over tipping alone. Which would force them to claim another agenda in terms of how they assessed a negative score or admit the truth which would instantly render those negative scores invalid given corporate policy.

Let's just say IMO that the circumstances might make for an interesting class action if they could muster enough autistic plaintiffs who were given poor ratings based on not being talkative or appearing menacing in some way which could be in fact relative to their autism whether the defendant acknowledges their condition or not. Hard to say how a civil jury might process such considerations. Yet the issue of autism itself may be a moot point given that such discrimination can occur against anyone for any reason based on fears and lower scores after-the-fact which did not result in anything actually going wrong for the driver. That the very nature of rating customers is inherently flawed when based on fear alone.

Still, simple avoidance of Uber is a far less complex and inexpensive way of expressing one's contempt for such alleged prejudice, whether over autism or anything else. Summoning a bunch of us autistic folk to show up and testify in court would be a daunting proposition in itself. Testifying in court and giving depositions are a grueling, stressful process testing one's mettle whether you have issues with interacting with others or not.

And then of course there's the dilemma of the value of indemnity to consider. The potential loss of service when you need it based on a sub-par rating. After all, it's not like Uber is a monopoly. Something the courts may not want to adjudicate over. So there are lots of pluses and minuses in the equation. Which seems to reflect the debate in this thread. Where action might be taken to achieve a better end, or it may amount to just another injustice people must take on the chin.

 

[Nitro]

Ok,if this makes you feel better,I will answer your original question with a simple answer. YES

 

[Progster]

Well I've never done any of the bad things listed, as I said I'm very respectful, but I don't usually give a tip and you should NOT have to give a tip to get 5 star status, that's totally wrong and is a type of extortion because it's blackmailing you to give a tip

I totally agree with your point about the tips. One shouldn't be obliged to give tips and one shouldn't be judged on your having given one or not.

Actually, I think that this deserves it's own thread, I shall start a new thread on the subject of tipping.