And here I think that if Alamo started turning down drivers with reservations at the rental counter on sight, and those drivers were even slightly disproportionately Black, Alamo would be in a world of hurt.

If they had no reason to turn down drivers other than their race, sure, but that's because it's illegal (on top of being morally repugnant). They can turn down drivers for other reasons just fine, though, even if they are disproportionately black. For example, I'm told that voter ID laws are wrong, because black people are less likely to have ID (presumably driver's license). Alamo is perfectly able to turn down drivers without driver licenses, even if they are disproportionately black.

My point is that the expectation is so strong that, absent something on your driving record to prevent it, you'll get a rental no matter what you look like as long as you have a reservation (which you'll get sight unseen).

That is not true of apartment renting; in fact, I'd argue, it's distinctively untrue of renting. Thus, my rebuttal to Rayiner.

This is much more true of rental companies that work at a scale close to Alamo. If you pass a background check and have a deposit you get a spot.

This is less true of mom and pop rentals. This is probably less true of mom and pop anything.

I think you're right that intuition based decisions make it easier for racism to creep in and are harder to diagnose and fix than process based decisions.

But this problem with renting is probably more true of hiring and firing and more impactful. Should we apply the same rules to hiring and firing?

At first blush, it sounds crazy. I don't know how to make it workable. But in the large, tech industry hiring is super bigoted! The problem you'd be correcting is very real.