Miscellaneous Transit Stories

[Busjack]

4 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Probably cause the democrats know he's done.

Actually, there was more substance to the speculation based on Toni Preckwinkle sitting in Bill Clinton's box.

[BusHunter]

She cant even run her office. I see a hispanic in office myself. It really is open season Chuy Garcia should run again.

 

 

 

 

[Pace831]

I witnessed this incident on the 606. Two guys got on, each carrying several large bags. One guy had a dog with him. The bus driver said something to them when they got on and the guy with the dog started yelling. "He doesn't need a muzzle, He's not aggressive. You're infringing on my right to bring a service animal on the bus". He pulled out some piece of paper and showed it to the driver. They argued a little longer and the bus driver then called the police because the guy was being extremely aggressive, telling the bus driver he was going to get him fired and take his job, and press charges against him. He then proceeded to tell everyone how they're all going to be late just because the driver won't let him bring his service animal on board, and continued to argue. He complained that the driver "stole his money" even though he voluntarily tapped his Ventra card during the argument. He also said the driver isn't allowed to ask about his "confidential medical history" and he should be fired for doing so. I couldn't hear what the driver was saying so I don't know whether he actually said anything he shouldn't have. However, it seemed the original issue was the dog didn't have a muzzle. So the police got there and everyone got off the bus to watch. I overheard some of the conversation between the officer and the guy with the dog. The cop said he couldn't make the driver let him ride, but there weren't grounds to press charges, which the guy wasn't happy about. His only option was to sue the driver and/or Pace. The cop also said "I don't know if it's a service animal or not, but if I would have let you on". Another bus pulled up then so everyone got on, and that driver didn't raise an issue about the dog. The guy then proceeded to tell everyone how the first driver "tried to infringe on his rights", adding that he was homeless and had PTSD, and the dog was to carry his Asthma inhaler and medication. Apparently he didn't mind sharing his "confidential medical history". Considering how quickly he started to argue, it seemed like he got on the bus expecting a fight.

According to BusTracker, 6434 went back to the garage after this incident instead of finishing the run.

[artthouwill]

3 hours ago, Pace831 said:

I witnessed this incident on the 606. Two guys got on, each carrying several large bags. One guy had a dog with him. The bus driver said something to them when they got on and the guy with the dog started yelling. "He doesn't need a muzzle, He's not aggressive. You're infringing on my right to bring a service animal on the bus". He pulled out some piece of paper and showed it to the driver. They argued a little longer and the bus driver then called the police because the guy was being extremely aggressive, telling the bus driver he was going to get him fired and take his job, and press charges against him. He then proceeded to tell everyone how they're all going to be late just because the driver won't let him bring his service animal on board, and continued to argue. He complained that the driver "stole his money" even though he voluntarily tapped his Ventra card during the argument. He also said the driver isn't allowed to ask about his "confidential medical history" and he should be fired for doing so. I couldn't hear what the driver was saying so I don't know whether he actually said anything he shouldn't have. However, it seemed the original issue was the dog didn't have a muzzle. So the police got there and everyone got off the bus to watch. I overheard some of the conversation between the officer and the guy with the dog. The cop said he couldn't make the driver let him ride, but there weren't grounds to press charges, which the guy wasn't happy about. His only option was to sue the driver and/or Pace. The cop also said "I don't know if it's a service animal or not, but if I would have let you on". Another bus pulled up then so everyone got on, and that driver didn't raise an issue about the dog. The guy then proceeded to tell everyone how the first driver "tried to infringe on his rights", adding that he was homeless and had PTSD, and the dog was to carry his Asthma inhaler and medication. Apparently he didn't mind sharing his "confidential medical history". Considering how quickly he started to argue, it seemed like he got on the bus expecting a fight.

According to BusTracker, 6434 went back to the garage after this incident instead of finishing the run.

Legally,  service animals are allowed to board.  Passengers who are handicapped or have some disability don't have to disclose their situation nor should they have to.  I have not heard of any requirement that a service animal must be muzzled.  It sounds like this person's rights were violated and that driver needs to undergo training

 

 

[BusHunter]

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Legally,  service animals are allowed to board.  Passengers who are handicapped or have some disability don't have to disclose their situation nor should they have to.  I have not heard of any requirement that a service animal must be muzzled.  It sounds like this person's rights were violated and that driver needs to undergo training

 

 

Yeah but if the dog is going to bite someone, that's a safety issue. There's a group of, looks like homeless men that ride with a german shepard, the german shepard is old and leaks urine all over the equipment. (not voluntarily, I think it has incontinence, I guess it can happen in dogs too) They ride all over. They look like homeless hillbillies honestly that walk around with dogs. Many are like that in the south. If so that dog has great value to that man, as much as a person. That one Twilight zone called "the hunt" explains it all.

Don't really know what I'd do in that situation. Probably just let them ride and if the bus gets dirty trade it off. But really if no one has to disclose why they have a service dog then technically everyone can ride with dogs and say they are a service animal. I'm waiting for a great dane to ride myself!! Those suckers are huge.

[Pace831]

7 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Legally,  service animals are allowed to board.  Passengers who are handicapped or have some disability don't have to disclose their situation nor should they have to.  I have not heard of any requirement that a service animal must be muzzled.  It sounds like this person's rights were violated and that driver needs to undergo training

The driver is only allowed to ask:

1. Is the animal a service animal that is required due to a disability?
2. What service does the animal perform?

Again, I couldn't hear what the driver said. I got the impression he wasn't saying they couldn't board, just that the dog would need a muzzle. The ADA doesn't require muzzles, but individual entities can require them as long as they do not impair the dog's ability to perform its service. It's possible there is a Pace policy requiring muzzles.

5 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Yeah but if the dog is going to bite someone, that's a safety issue.

This dog was well behaved, and acted as a trained service dog should. I was more afraid of being bitten by its owner.

5 hours ago, BusHunter said:

But really if no one has to disclose why they have a service dog then technically everyone can ride with dogs and say they are a service animal.

If the dog is disruptive to others or urinates/defecates inappropriately, it is legal to have the dog and owner removed from the premises. A real service dog should be trained to stay mostly still when not performing a task, and not interfere with others' experience in that place.

[Busjack]

It seems that the bottom line is the ADA Service Animal regulation. It allows requiring that the animal be harnessed unless that interferes with the animal's function, but that seems about it. On BusHunter's point, all that is required is that the dog respond to commands if not leashed, but service dogs are usually well trained. The FTA ADA manual adopts the Justice Dept. requirements.

It appears that generally speaking the potential passenger was correct. The police officer was generally correct that it was a civil matter, except that the two parties were causing a disturbance.

If I were the passenger, I would file a complaint with the FTA.

 

[BusHunter]

It all depends on whether there's a muzzle policy at Pace. The man sounds like he was extremely anxious like this has happened to him before, but an insult to the dog to those guys is like saying your mother or father can't ride the bus with you. They are not going to put a muzzle on the dog without a fuss. Now what the driver was thinking probably was this was a big dog and the securitas dogs all have muzzles, most are german shepards, but they are defense dogs. Really there needs to be some regulation and the dog needs to have an operator ID someone can show to prove it is a service dog. Because like I said before i could bring a boxer or doberman pinscher on and say it is my service dog.

[Busjack]

9 hours ago, BusHunter said:

It all depends on whether there's a muzzle policy at Pace.

No, it doesn't. Pace has to comply with DOJ and FTA regulations.

But, in any event, I did a search on pacebus.com and the only place "service animal" was mentioned is that you can take your human caregiver and one on ADA paratransit.

[Pace831]

I agree that the passenger was correct about his rights. However, whether the bus driver actually said any of the things he was accused of saying is another matter. The police were probably called because of the passenger's demeanor, not the dog.

I also could not find any indication that Pace has a muzzle policy.

[Pace831]

7 hours ago, Busjack said:

the two parties were causing a disturbance.

Only the man with the dog was causing a disturbance. I assume the other party you are referring to was the bus driver, who didn't say much. He just picked up the phone to call police and ignored the passenger when he started insulting him and threatening to get him fired.

7 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Really there needs to be some regulation and the dog needs to have an operator ID someone can show to prove it is a service dog.

The guy showed a piece of paper to the bus driver that I guess was supposed to be proof that his dog was a service animal. I saw him showing the paper to the cop, but the cop later said "I don't know if it's a service animal or not". However, if his dog really was a fake service animal, the way it behaved suggested it was a genuine fake.

[BusHunter]

That is really what did it. You can't  threaten people because they'll just call the cops. Like I say if it's the guys I saw probably I'd be more concerned about the welfare of the dog. Maybe this dog was leaking cause it was sick. Maybe some type of urinary infection, but the whole group was unkept like hobos. Clearly their living on the street. 

[garmon757]

@Busjack Your post has been partially deleted because I don't understand what does Rosa Parks has to do with the current conversation about service animals. 

[Pace831]

56 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

That is really what did it. You can't  threaten people because they'll just call the cops. Like I say if it's the guys I saw probably I'd be more concerned about the welfare of the dog. Maybe this dog was leaking cause it was sick. Maybe some type of urinary infection, but the whole group was unkept like hobos. Clearly their living on the street. 

These two fit the description the guys you saw. You can see in my photo above the guy with the dog carrying a guitar case and another large bag. The other guy is the one in the tie-dye shirt also carrying large bags, standing behind the trash can by the shelter.

They didn't directly threaten anybody by saying something to the effect of "I'm going to hurt you". However, I think it was reasonable for the bus driver to feel intimidated. Most of the people on the bus seemed uneasy at first because of how strongly he reacted to whatever the driver initially said.

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, garmon757 said:

@Busjack Your post has been partially deleted because I don't understand what does Rosa Parks has to do with the current conversation about service animals. 

That has a simple answer. The FTA page on complaints is that its Office of Civil Rights covers:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): prohibits discrimination based on disability 

Title VI: prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin

So, this passenger's civil rights were violated by an entity that is subject to both laws.

I understand that you are too young to have lived through that and are a member of a protected class (as they put it in the Civil Rights cases), but it was a fair comment in the legal sense. The potential passenger was not subject to conditions on federal rights that Bus Hunter wanted to put on them, and his federal civil rights were violated. Legally no different than being told  you can ride the bus only if you sit on the engine compartment,

17 hours ago, Pace831 said:

The police were probably called because of the passenger's demeanor, not the dog.

Of course. However, the driver provoked the confrontation by not doing his job, which was to allow the passenger on the bus. I'm not going to go into what the driver's motivation in provoking the confrontation or calling the police was, other than to note your comment that the follower let the passenger on without dispute. Based on considerations Garmon raised above, I'm also not going to comment on what BH or you think how the passenger should have approached the driver, other than to say people whose rights are infringed usually don't take it calmly,

[Pace831]

32 minutes ago, Busjack said:

However, the driver provoked the confrontation by not doing his job, which was to allow the passenger on the bus.

The driver's initial question would seem to have been "Does the dog have a muzzle?" That question doesn't demonstrate an intent to keep them off the bus, just that he erroneously believed service dogs must be muzzled. The passenger provoked the argument when he started yelling at the driver, whether that was a sensible reaction or not. As I said before, the passenger clearly knew his rights, but I can't judge the accuracy of his account of what the driver said to him.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, Pace831 said:

The driver's initial question would seem to have been "Does the dog have a muzzle?" That question doesn't demonstrate an intent to keep them off the bus, just that he erroneously believed service dogs must be muzzled. The passenger provoked the argument when he started yelling at the driver, whether that was a sensible reaction or not. As I said before, the passenger clearly knew his rights, but I can't judge the accuracy of his account of what the driver said to him.

As I indicated above, an argument would not have been provoked by anyone if the driver had done his job. However, you seem to have a mixed reaction to hearsay (he said, rather than direct observation).

[Pace831]

Just now, Busjack said:

As I indicated above, an argument would not have been provoked by anyone if the driver had done his job.

What makes you so sure the driver didn't do his job? Without hearing what he actually said, we can't say that for sure. The only thing he likely did wrong was saying the dog needs to be muzzled, but that's not the same as saying they can't ride the bus at all. If a passenger starts yelling at and intimidating the driver, the police will be called regardless of what was said.

[Busjack]

3 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

What makes you so sure the driver didn't do his job?

If he didn't admit the passenger without question (other than "is that a service dog?"), he didn't do his job.

3 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

Without hearing what he actually said

As I said, you seem to either credit hearsay or reject it. If you don't know what happened or witnessed what anyone initially said, you shouldn't have posted.

[Pace831]

5 minutes ago, Busjack said:

If he didn't admit the passenger without question (other than "is that a service dog?"), he didn't do his job.

As I said, you seem to either credit hearsay or reject it. If you don't know what happened or witnessed what anyone initially said, you shouldn't have posted.

Neither of us know what he actually said, so I can't say whose fault this incident was nor can you say the driver didn't do his job. If you reread my earlier posts, I already said that the driver most likely asked whether the dog had a muzzle, not that he did say that. I made that inference based on 1) The driver not having much time to say anything, and 2) The passenger's reaction to what he said. After that, I have no idea what the driver said or whether the passenger's accusations had any merit. I did note that he was mostly ignoring the passenger, because I could see his face in the mirror. He was leaning toward the window, not saying anything when he wasn't on the phone with the police. If he said anything to the passenger he shouldn't have, he would have said it immediately after the passenger's initial reaction during the first minute of the conversation. The passenger's accusations that he had asked prohibited questions came a few minutes after that.

[Busjack]

As I said in my second sentence you quoted....

which should end it.

[Pace831]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

As I said in my second sentence you quoted....

which should end it.

I never said I believe or disbelieve the passenger's accusations. I only offered an account of what probably happened.

This argument isn't going much farther than bus 6434, so I think I'll take your suggestion to "end it".

[BusHunter]

Of course the whole "we are disabled" has yet to be proven. You can't  violate someone's  rights if they are not who they say they are.  Frankly as dirty as these guys look if they went to a hospital they would probably be referred to a social worker and the dog would be remanded from their custody. So if it smells like bs, looks like bs, it probably is bs

[Pace831]

2 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

 Of course the whole "we are disabled" has yet to be proven. You can't  violate someone's  rights if they are not who they say they are.  Frankly as dirty as these guys look if they went to a hospital they would probably be referred to a social worker and the dog would be remanded from their custody. So if it smells like bs, looks like bs, it probably is bs

He said the dog was for PTSD and to carry his asthma inhaler. The former would not entitle the dog to public access, as it would be classified as a comfort animal. There are service dogs to identify asthma triggers, but a dog isn't needed if its only function is to carry an inhaler, as the man implied. I did note, however, that the dog behaved like a trained service animal should, hence my "genuine fake" comment above.

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Pace831 said:

He said the dog was for PTSD and to carry his asthma inhaler. The former would not entitle the dog to public access, as it would be classified as a comfort animal.

BusHunter is certainly wrong, but you are incorrect too. The ADA regulations I cited say:

Service animals are defined as dogs that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. Examples of such work or tasks include guiding people who are blind, alerting people who are deaf, pulling a wheelchair, alerting and protecting a person who is having a seizure, reminding a person with mental illness to take prescribed medications, calming a person with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during an anxiety attack, or performing other duties.