Dillard’s ejected disabled Army Staff Sergeant J. Alex Gozalez and his service dog Mason for violating the store’s no animals policy. The store manager did not believe that Gonzalez is disabled because he is neither blind nor deaf. Gonzalez uses Mason—who wore a vest reading: “SERVICE DOG – DO NOT PET”—to help keep his balance.
When Gonzalez explained that he is disabled and was training Mason to help him, the manager responded that dogs were not allowed in the store and that Gonzalez would be escorted out, Gonzalez said.
The manager was “very firm, and I felt embarrassed and ashamed,” Gonzalez said. “I felt like I was disrespected.”
Dillard’s officials say Gonzalez never identified himself as disabled and only indicated that he was training the dog.
“On a daily basis Dillard’s welcomes customers with service dogs into many of its stores across the country,” Johnson said.
“If a person wishes to seek to train a dog in a Dillard’s department store, the respective store manager needs to be contacted so that the best time can be established for both parties.”
After leaving the store, Gonzalez contacted Hurst police. Officers talked with Gonzalez and the manager and determined that the dispute was a civil matter. Police say there was a report of the dog causing a disturbance in the store, which gives the business owner a right to ask the animal to leave.
However, if a business owner is suspected of discriminating against a disabled person with a service animal, the business owner can be ticketed for misdemeanor discrimination, police said.
A Dillard’s District Manager called Gonzalez the next day to profusely apologize for his store’s insensitive disregard for the Americans With Disabilities Act. Gonzalez was unmoved, and claims that he will never shop at Dillard’s again: “I felt embarrassed, low. I’m over here accepting my disability in public, and you are going to mock and harass me?”
Store boots disabled vet and his service dog [Star-Tribune]
(Photo: D.J. Peters/Star-Tribune)
More From Consumerist
-
Veteran Claims Anti-War Landlord Discriminated Against Him In Refusing Him An Apartment
-
Guy Figures If He Boots His Own Car, Thieves Won’t Be So Tempted To Steal It
-
Restaurant Says ‘No Pets,’ Tries To Make Iraq Vet And Her Service Dog Leave
-
Flying The Friendly Skies Friday: The Happiest of Birthdays; Upgrades For Everybody
-
Help Us, Obi Wan Kenobi: EA Signs Deal With Disney To Publish New Star Wars Games
@MisterE: About which, the vet-ness or the disabled-ness?
I’ve had people tell me I shouldn’t be trying to do things I want to do because those things “just weren’t made for deaf people”.
WTF?
Read this, and you’ll be disgusted at the hate, bigotry, and outright uncaring attitudes of people toward those who just want equal access to things “normal” people enjoy … and just need a little bit of help.
About the Project[CC]
@Pylon83: Except for the fact that the dog WAS clearly labelled as a service animal and service animals are required, by the ADA, to be given access to businesses which normally don’t allow animals. I’m disabled, don’t need a service animal because of it, but I know my rights under the law were I deaf to the point where I did need a dog …
Unlabelled dog, you might have a point. Labelled dog, the guy should have taken one look and turned around and walked away.
@blkhrt1: Consider, however, the fact that the disabled may not be able to reach the shelves at ALL at the “normal” height, while those who aren’t can adjust themselves to reach them. Helping others sometimes requires a slight bit of effort, but when you’re talking about a little bit of trouble some people that prevents others from being TOTALLY excluded, is a worthy compromise. My disability doesn’t stop me from reaching for items on shelves but being disabled in another way means that I can put myself in others’ shoes and am willing to help out.
@Pylon83: Except you know nothing about the person’s disability. Who are you (and I, and anyone else here) to judge whether he’s “right” to have a dog?
The ADA says that he and his dog have to be granted equal access. So he gets equal access, end of story.
You have to go through quite a bit to get a dog, so you only have a dog if you have a real need for one, by the way.
@Pylon83:
I agree with you there… it should be reasonable.
@Buran:
From the way this story reads, he did get the dog from an organization that trains dogs. It seems he bought a dog, and is trying to train it using DVD’s. Come on, I don’t think anyone can say that rises to the same level as an actual properly trained service dog. On its face, it seems he went through nothing to get the dog, other than buying some DVD’s. Maybe we don’t have the whole story, but based on what has been published, I think the whole situation is a bit questionable.
Further, I still refuse to accept that the simple fact that the dog has a vest should be definitive as to whether it has a right to be there. A cursory search of E-Bay shows those vests are readily available for you and I to purchase at will. I should not be able to slap one of those on my dog and waltz into any store without have to at least answer a question from the proprietor as to the necessity for the dog. I liken it to using your friends handicapped permit to get a close spot.
@Pylon83: Right, but the man identified himself as disabled and the dog as a service animal in training. At that point, they can’t require proof, they have to accept his word for it…the most they can do is ask if it is a service animal.
@Buran:
Additionally, I think that you and I and the public at large do have some right to question the reasonableness of using a service dog. Once a person has a legal right to a service animal, they get to impose on the rights of others to exclude animals from their private businesses. This is a pretty large infringement of private property rights that is acceptable under certain circumstances. I believe that the public, and their elected representatives, absolutely have the right to judge whether the use of a dog and the associated privileges is reasonable. There are a number of disabilities out there in which a service animal would be wholly inappropriate and unreasonable. If the general public is not allowed to judge those situations, who is?
@Pylon83: According to the article, he’s following the guidelines to train the dog. Whether the DVDs are a supplement to that or are something else, I don’t know, but he’s following their directions and is in the process of getting the dog certified…
@coren:
I think the only point in which you are wrong is the “dog in training” part. In order for a service dog in training in TX to be given the same rights as a full-fledged service dog it must be under the care and control of a person who is an agent for an organization who trains such animals. I imagine this was done to keep “amateur” trainers from abusing the ADA. Let’s be honest, this guy was training the dog based on a DVD. He is not a professional service dog trainer, and thus is not entitled to the rights and protections of the quoted law.
@Bryan Price: Are you supposed to train your own service dogs? I always presumed that “legitimate” service dogs were provided by some sort of organization.
And while I’m hesitant to impose my judgment on someone else’s disability, I wonder if a cane might be a better adaptation for “losing balance” than a dog.
@D.B. Cooper-Nichol:
I agree. I think that better controls are in place when you are required to obtain the dog from a certified, etc. organization after providing the necessary proof that you need a dog.
I know some folks who purchased a “service dog in training” vest online, just so they could take their pet to the mall with them.
Scummy, but unfortunately not unique.
This is so fascinating. If this vet had been a crippled girl we would have been overwhelmed with posts calling for the manager’s lynching. [consumerist.com]
The only “disturbance” mentioned is the puppy’s reluctance boarding the escalator. I imagine that would cause a bit of a bottleneck during a busy shopping day. Although the article did say the puppy can be a bit rambunctious they did not say he was rambunctious this time.
The vet was trying to be honest and not play the disabled card. He told the manager the dog was in training to explain the “non professional” behavior of the dog.
Unless the dog was causing a major disruption the manager should have just let it go when told the dog was in training even though he is legally in the right removing the dog.
And this is what happens in America during the holidays in department stores…retail employees who work way too many long hours for too little pay get crabby.
I am not sure I beleive the part about the dog creating a disturbance, as even the dogs in training with these programs are usually extremely well behaved. We used to have a lady bring hers into church with her every sunday and that dog was very well behaved. Never causing any disturbace the entire service.
Just sounds to me like this guy really didn’t like dogs.
@Pylon83: What!! This guy was “training” a dog using a dvd? I suspected as much because his vest didn’t label the organization affiliated with the training.
He should be cited for animal cruelty and for impersonating a real animal trainer. I’m serious. This guy is a jerk.
Like I said my mom is disabled, and no way would buy a vest for her dogs and pretend that she is training them because she happens to be disabled.
@headon: A triple coiler with a DQ swirl, if possible.
@gingerCE: Wow! This vet is perfectly capable of training a dog. Cruelty my ass.
Who better to train a dog then the person using the dog. This vet is training the dog now while he is able, so the dog can serve him when he is further disabled.
@trollkiller:
While he may be capable of training the dog, sich conduct does not rise to the level of that protected by law. It is fairly clear from the wording of the statute that only essentially professionals training service dogs are afforded protection. Ii certainly don’t think it rises to animal cruelty, I also don’t think his conduct deserves protection. If the protections afforded by the ADA are allowed to be abused, the whole system, and those with legitimate needs for its protections, suffer.
I don’t get how the Americans With Disabilities Act is a civil matter? Anyone? Anyone?
I wonder what it’s like to be a disabled veteran, possibly unable to afford the tens of thousands of dollars it takes to purchase a trained service dog, trying to train a dog yourself so that you can regain independence, only to be told that you aren’t handicapped enough for Dillard’s.
I’m guessing it’s not too great.
So how did Dillard’s boots disable a vet and his dog? Did they cause him to trip and fall on it?
Hopefully there were witnesses who can confirm/deny whether the man clearly identified himself as disabled and training a service animal.
“When Gonzalez holds Mason’s leash or clips it to his belt loop, the dog prevents Gonzalez from falling if his knees give out or he loses his balance.”
I’d really like to see that in action. What does the dog do if Gonzalez falls forward, zip around behind him and pull?!?
@pylon83: No argument there, my offense came from the “He should be cited for animal cruelty and for impersonating a real animal trainer. I’m serious. This guy is a jerk.” comment.
@sibertater: Civil as in not an arrestable offense. Like a traffic ticket, you are still breaking the law but it is a civil infraction.
@EtherealStrife: I am thinking he catches himself on the dog. If that is the case I think he may want to get a bigger dog.
I’ve been training Service dogs for the Guiding Eyes for the Blind for some years now, and this is a very typical experience.
Kudos to the Hurst Police Department for repeating the mantra of their Brethren across the Nation; “It’s a civil matter”. This statement (roughly translated) really means; “Stop bothering us, and let us get back to the doughnut shop”. These are your Patriot Act tax dollars at work here folks.
@bobpence:
How about people in Iron Lungs? Should every store have to cater to every disability?
For being so ‘socialist,’ it seems like they’ve left the decision up to the free market.
@boberto:
“It is a civil matter” means that the police do not have jurisdiction. They have no power to do anything about it.
@trollkiller: Eventually professional guide dog trainers will work with the disabled person and the animal to train them together.
For him to decide to take it upon himself to train his own dog seems dangerous and unethical to me. He is an amateur. We’re not talking basic behavior training–guide dogs go through rigorous training and testing–someone who doesn’t know what they are doing could be in danger of abusing or harming the dog.
The reason he may have decided to go on his own is a) it is cheaper although many organizations will give guide dogs to free for those who cannot afford them BUT they’d have to qualify. I doubt this man would qualify for a free trained guide dog which is why he decided to go on his own.
I absolutely believe this man needs to be investigated for animal cruelty.
@gingerCE: What would be your basis for animal cruelty? Maybe you are seeing something here I am missing. The dog is not a guide dog, so it would not require the ability to “read” traffic or maneuvering its master through a crowded room.
As for training his own dog, anyone that has the time a patience can properly train a dog. I have owned professionally trained dogs and dogs we have trained ourselves. There was no difference in the performance of the dogs. These were not house pets but guard and protection trained.
Why would it be unethical to train an animal to help you? Not getting it. Please explain your position further.
Did anybody else notice the guy is stepping on the dog’s tail in the photo?
Maybe I am not reading the article thoroughly, but I feel as if I am missing some important facts. The title is misleading. . I wonder how a dog can assist someone 4 or 5 times his weight with balance, but I also, (while sympathizing with anyone who is diabled, and particular a veteran)wonder how the shopper (vet) thought taking a dog in a store would be low profile. Did I read right in that he felt embarrassment in the attention that was created? Standard Operating Procedure in most retail situations is to not allow animals in, unless they are clearly service animals. Store management has to consider all customer’s needs, and there are those who are allergic to animals. When working in a store previously, a stray had entered and I had to remove feces that had been tracked through the store. This is not a pleasant task and it could have resulted in fines from the health department. This manager may well have lost their job because of this unfortunate situation. Too bad everyone involved could not have been better prepared – but how?
Cane. End.
@trollkiller: Hi. I have 3 dogs myself and while in the past used a professional dog trainer for obedience lessons, I train my dogs now on my own. That’s not the issue. Guide/Service dogs go through rigorous training/testing–it is not the same as guard and/or basic behavior training.
He should not be training a dog to be a guide/service dog without professional oversight. He should be attending classes at the very least. Many times these dogs are chosen specifically after careful examination–they don’t just randomly pick up some dogs from the pound. Not all dogs were meant to do this.
As far as I’m concerned, he put a jacket on that dog and was testing that dog when he was untrained to do so. The ADA act does not protect amateur individuals who decide to train dogs on their own. I think his case is borderline fraud.
For those who don’t believe dogs can help with balance, do a little research, it is posted right on the DOJ website that was posted early in the comments section:
Service animals perform some of the functions and tasks that the individual with a disability cannot perform for him or herself. “Seeing eye dogs” are one type of service animal, used by some individuals who are blind. This is the type of service animal with which most people are familiar. But there are service animals that assist persons with other kinds of disabilities in their day-to-day activities. Some examples include:
_____Alerting persons with hearing impairments to sounds.
_____ Pulling wheelchairs or carrying and picking up things for persons with mobility impairments.
_____Assisting persons with mobility impairments with balance.
The third example is pretty clear.
And YES, the police can ticket the owner, it is not just a “civil matter” and is even in the excerpt above:
However, if a business owner is suspected of discriminating against a disabled person with a service animal, the business owner can be ticketed for misdemeanor discrimination, police said.
If you read the complete ADA (not terribly thrilling) it basically says that discriminating against anyone with any type of disability is a criminal offense. Refusing the vet and his service animal is no different than refusing a black person admittance. I noticed that the vet is a middle aged white guy. Where are the Al Sharptons and Jessie Jacksons defending him against discrimination?
Having said the above, I’ve also seen the law abused. As a frequent customer of the local Starbucks, there’s a middle aged woman who also frequents the place. She brings a pair of yip yip dogs with homemade sweaters that say “service animal” on them and allows these muts to run loose in the restaurant. The staff is afraid to say “boo” under penalty of being sued.
I worked in the DFW Dillard’s stores for over 4 years… and management is an absolute joke. They are poorly trained over-glorified sales people. I’ve seen sooooo much worse than this.
A dog in a retail store? Ever been to New York? People bring their inbred teacup vanity dogs everywhere with them. It doesn’t bother me, but I did see a dog take a piss in a mall when I was in Germany, and the owner didn’t seem to care.
@Pylon83: You can’t exclude disabled people from your business. That is a protected class under federal law. It doesn’t matter whether or not the business owner likes it or not. If you go into business you’re obligated to obey the rules; if you don’t like it, you should not be in business.
@gingerCE: The ADA act does not protect amateur individuals who decide to train dogs on their own.
Q: What is a service animal?[www.usdoj.gov]
A: The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.
I don’t think you are correct in what the ADA protects. The way I read “individually trained” means the animal has been trained in a specific task or tasks for that disabled person. In the case of the vet the specific task may be for the dog to just stand there when leaned on. Something I feel the vet is capable of training the dog to do. But I agree he should be under some professional over site if nothing more than to make sure he is training the dog correctly.
I will argue that a properly trained protection dog is just a vigorously trained as a service dog. Properly training a dog for weapons detection, seek, watch, take down a subject with minimal damage and most importantly to release a subject when ordered is pretty intensive training, I would put that on par with retrieving the telephone, remote or crossing the street safely. I know how much work goes into training a dog, that is why I would rather someone else do it for me.
Everything else I pretty much agree with you.
p.s. it sucked owning a protection dog as a kid, we never could keep our toy guns as Caesar would aways take them from us and chew them to bits. When you are 8 you can’t win an argument with a determined Great Dane.
@shor0814:
@bvita:
TITLE 42–THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
CHAPTER 126–EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
SUBCHAPTER III–PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND SERVICES OPERATED BY PRIVATE ENTITIES
Sec. 12188. Enforcement
[frwebgate.access.gpo.gov]
(B) Potential violation
If the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe
that–
(i) any person or group of persons is engaged in a
pattern or practice of discrimination under this subchapter;
or
(ii) any person or group of persons has been
discriminated against under this subchapter and such
discrimination raises an issue of general public importance,
the Attorney General may commence a civil action in any
appropriate United States district court.
Sorry guys the cops are right, it is a civil matter.
That’s pretty douchey. I mean, wtf, the guy thinks he can just walk around with his assistant dog all over the place? What is this, PetSmart? (j/k)
Personally I think all well behaved animals should be allowed everywhere. Either way – I’ll never shop at dillards because of this. What a jerk of a manager, especially to a vet.
Exactly. Cane + Vet – Dog = less troubles.
Also, this is from the newspaper.
“Gonzalez says he is continuously training the sometimes rambunctious dog, using DVD instruction and online information in accordance with the Assistance Dogs International Checklist.
Gonzalez said he is in the process of having Mason certified as an official service dog.”
The dog isn’t even an official service dog. So there…
@blkhrt1: Seriously? You’re upset because you’ll have to bend? Oh the horror!
I have never heard of a service dog being used to keep balance.
@m4rcus: That’s funny, because I have heard of dogs being used for balance. A cane isn’t going to stop someone from shaking uncontrollably but a dog can.
I grew up in the hellhole known as Hurst and this doesn’t surprise me at all. Be wary of being non-white or looking shabby there, they don’t take kindly to that stock.
Hurst cops care more about busting teens and non-white people than actually dealing with any matter.
Do I sound bitter? Of course. I was white and rich when I grew up there, my close friends were not and the discrimination in comparison was painful. It’s a suburban hellhole.
@Buran: That link was absolutely disgusting.
And since accessibility is a big trend in video games (it’s been 3rd-party accessories up ’til now, but now a lot of the console makers and game makers are getting on board), those people are way out of touch anyway. Fortunately, I guess.
What assholes, especially when video games are frequently one of the few ways disabled kids can interact on a very “normal” level with their peers, and where the differences and difficulties of a disability can be wiped away.
@bobpence: Yes, the U.S. actually does a huge business in tourism for disabled foreigners, BECAUSE of the ADA and how far the U.S. goes to make everything possible accessible. For many disabled tourists, it’s easier to get around on vacation here than at home. (Too bad we’re harassing foreigners so much at customs/immigration that nobody wants to tourist it up here anymore!)
@trollkiller: “As for training his own dog, anyone that has the time a patience can properly train a dog.”
It’s not the same thing. Typically, service dogs are chosen very young, put out to families who raise, socialize, and train them until they’re about a year old, using a very strict protocol. Then they’re removed from that family and go to “doggie college” to learn their actual business of service. A lot of them — a LOT of them — wash out, which is part of why families do the early raising: they’ll often adopt the washouts. THEN the the dog has to be matched to a disabled person, and the two have to be trained together — which also doesn’t always work out.
I, too, am suspicious of someone training their own service animal. I *HAVE* seen situations/met service dogs where the dog trained itself — typically seizure-sensing dogs who were family pets who alerted them to seizures, then got training from the local organization. But those dogs, no matter how smart, are never up to the standard of “professionalism” that a trained-from-birth service animal is.
I don’t know enough to say about this veteran’s dog and its training, but training service animals is VERY different than normal training, protection training, or even K-9 cop training. It’s EXTREMELY unusual for it to be undertaken by an amateur, and it’s even MORE unusual for it to be undertaken successfully by an amateur.