Fragrance Free Filter

[Susan612]

Hello I am looking for hosts that would like a fragrance free filter added to the accessibility filters. And yes for those who might not know fragrance  a disabling for some and acknowledged as such under ADA definition.

[Mike-And-Jane0]

@Susan612 Is there a legal definition of fragrance free? I suspect every property has a fragrance of sorts.

[Susan612]

@Mike-And-Jane0  There is no legal definition. From my experience hosts who claim to be fragrance free choose so because of their own preference or disability. Fragrance free listings are generally thought of as listings that use no fragranced consumer products such as air fresheners, fragrance wands, fragranced laundry detergents etc

[Jean5718]

Nope, 

[Monica107]

smell is not fragrance...each product with the word "scent", parfum and fragrance is the issue. 

[Anonymous]

@Susan612   The many, many times you've tried to resurrect this topic, hosts have pointed out many reasons this would not be a good idea. I'm sure you'll never be persuaded of that, but you're not the party that will be held liable and risk losing income when a guest reports that an accessibility amenity was not delivered.

Hosts would be really unwise to guarantee a "fragrance free" environment, when all it takes to be in breach of contract is the guest saying they smell something.

Rather than beating this dead horse even further, can I offer you an alternative idea to campaign on? In its early days, Airbnb used to offer a keyword search for listings. Bringing back that feature would allow guests with a broad spectrum of specific interests, lifestyles, and needs to connect with similarly inclined hosts and locate uniquely suitable homes. Private Room guests seeking social stays with people who share common identity or who want first-hand contact with a different one (e.g. vegan, Buddhist, Nudist, LGBT). Entire Home guests looking for homes containing a rare or regionally-specific amenity. Farmstay guests who want to be around a specific animal. And, indeed, fragrance-sensitive guests like yourself, seeking hosts who share your condition and are uniquely able to accommodate it.  Hosts benefit from not getting boxed into a corner with a vague filter tickbox that locks them into guaranteeing any of these things as a feature, and getting guests who are likelier to appreciate the unique qualities of their homes. 

Everybody wins, and you can attract a hell of a lot more people to your cause than you've managed up to now.

[Andrea5437]

It would have been nice if you could have made your point without being so condescending. 

[Jean5718]

WOW. Just like people in wheelchairs should just not worry about stairs.  Very rude response and you don't have to participate in this discussion.  Obviously you find people with disabilities distasteful.

[Anonymous]

@Jean5718   What on earth are you talking about?  Wheelchairs and MCS are simply not comparable as accessibility issues.

I think every host is 100% aware of whether their property has stairs. There's no ambiguity - either you have them or you don't. But when the host earnestly believes they've done everything they can to meet the "fragrance free" criteria, and it's still so unacceptable to the guest that they have to turn around and drive home (as you describe below), that is a nightmare situation for both host and guest.

This is exactly why a "fragrance free" filter would be a really terrible idea. Situations like the one you describe would be rampant, holidays would be ruined.

[Keith745]

[Cindy1311]

MCS is a physical disability recognized by ADA.
Fragrance free accommodations are straight forward. 
No air fresheners, like plug ins. Fabreeze, candles or items specifically used to mask odors.
fragrance free cleaning products & laundry detergents , no dryer sheets or fabric softeners. 

[Sarah5582]

I agree, it isn’t that hard to use fragrance free products especially for towels, sheets. No air fresheners no fragranced garbage bags or candles. 

[Monica107]

Yes, they are and recognized by ADA. I'm receiving disability benefits from my state due to this issue.  So my state disagrees with you 

[Monica107]

They do not even believe this is real I'm afraid. I have papers from my state stating I'm disabled with this. 

[Brian450]

You raise good points concerning implementation. They can all be addressed and resolved by not making an open-ended "fragrance-free" promise, which indeed has an element of subjectivity and could cause too great liability risks for hosts, but by creating a specifically defined "reduced fragrance" accommodation, with a clear list of do's and don'ts, and ruling out host liability for anything on The List that is not objectively verifiable.

I outlined in another post on this thread what such a list could look like. Checking the "reduced fragrance" box would oblige hosts to items on that list ONLY.

Guests would be notified that the "reduced fragrance" attribute comes with reduced host liability. The host is liable only if an item on the list is clearly violated.

For example, if a guest arrives and finds plug-in air fresheners, or toilet bowl fresheners, in the property, the guest can take a picture of these and prove that one of the conditions was violated. 

Enforcement would mostly be through a new feedback system tailored to this accommodation. After every stay in a "reduced fragrance" property, guests would answer a number of yes-no questions related to The List, and assign an overall 1-10 subjective "fragrance free" score to the property.

With this, every host would build up a system of scores related to fragrance over time. Fragrance-sensitive travelers could relatively confidently book properties with high  scores, and avoid those with low scores. Hosts could make changes in response to the score they received.

This system would be far more helpful for fragrance-sensitive travelers than keyword search, because it would actively educate hosts on what the community needs, and create a feedback system through which hosts can improve their fragrance-free offerings, and allow guests to avoid properties that are unlikely to work for them, without creating unworkable host liabilities.