Equal Access is now on Facebook. Please take the time to join us and we kept up to date with what is happening in the world of accessibility for people with a disability. Click on the Logo above to access the page.
Make sure you click on the “Like” link to be kept up to date
Disability group mad as hell and ready to fightVoters are being asked to back only parties that promise a national disability insurance scheme
IN the 1976 movie Network, Peter Finch in his role as a television broadcaster urges people to go to their windows, stick their heads out and shout: “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not gonna take this any more.” Windows are thrown open and the words echo around the country.
Australians with disability and their supporters are hoping for something similar from the campaign they are launching via their “australiansmadashell” website. As it says, “we are not going to take it any more — and there are millions of us”.
They are asking people to take a pledge to vote in state and federal elections only for parties that promise to introduce a national disability insurance scheme. The responses will be compiled and candidates, particularly in marginal seats, will be told of the number of pledges in their electorate.
An insurance scheme, rather than paying a welfare benefit or damages, as with motor vehicle or workers’ compensation schemes, would provide the essential services and facilities to the disabled and increase their prospects of a meaningful life, including a job. It would constitute a landmark economic and social reform and, while costly in the short term, would pay for itself in the long run, according to its proponents.
Justice: Lawyer fined for snubbing service dogA Colorado Springs attorney accused of not allowing a disabled woman and her service dog into his office because he feared his new carpet might be soiled will pay $50,000 as part of a consent decree approved by a federal court today.
A November 2009 complaint accused Patric LeHouillier of violating the Americans with Disabilities act by barring Joan Murnane, a veterinarian with brain and other injuries that affect her balance, from entering his law office because her service dog was with her.
The complaint says LeHouillier and his firm, LeHouillier & Associates, expressed concern that the Australian shepherd might soil its new carpet, according to a report in Westword.
That decision, under the consent decree, will cost him $50,000 – $30,000 for Murnane, $10,000 for her husband and another $10,000 for a civil penalty.
“For almost two decades, the ADA has ensured that individuals with disabilities are guaranteed full and equal access to public accommodations, both large and small,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department is unrelenting in [eradicating] discrimination against people with disabilities and ensuring that owners and operators of public accommodations recognize their obligations to provide equal access.”
Disabled protest at lack of access to stadiumsSA DISABILITY Alliance (Sada) members burnt tyres at SA Football Association (Safa) House, south of Johannesburg, yesterday in protest against the lack of accessibility of 2010 World Cup stadiums to people with disabilities.
“We burnt tyres because they are our mobility, but they cannot get us into stadiums,” said Sada executive Ari Seirlis.
Security guards extinguished three burning wheelchair tyres, while protesters chanted and waved placards. “LOC (Local Organising Committee) let us down,” read a placard.
Another read: “Stadia no accessible for disabled, no legacy for us.”
Seirlis said the alliance was not burning tyres because it was fashionable, but because it showed the pain of the disabled at not being able to attend any of the 2010 World Cup matches.
“We want to be there but the stadiums are not ready to accommodate us,” he said.
About 100 members of Sada sang liberation songs as they rolled their wheelchairs from the parking bays opposite Safa house to the entrance, where a memorandum of demands was handed over to local organising committee chief executive officer Danny Jordaan.
Taxi driver fined for refusing to carry guide dogTAXI driver James Young could not have picked a worse person to refuse a fare.
The man in the back of his cab was none other than the Australian Disability Discrimination Commissioner, Graeme Innes.
Mr Innes and his guide dog, a golden labrador named Jordie, had no sooner entered the cab at the Market Street taxi rank when the first words out of Mr Young’s mouth were ”no dog, no dog,” Mr Innes yesterday told a hearing at the Downing Centre Local Court.
Mr Young had pleaded not guilty to discriminating against Mr Innes by refusing to drive him and the guide dog on April 9, 2009. But he was yesterday convicted and fined $750 and ordered to pay $2500 in legal fees after the magistrate Julie Huber found the offence proven.
Mr Innes, a lawyer and human rights advocate who has helped shape anti-discrimination legislation, told the court he explained to Mr Young that the law required him to take the fare, but the driver still refused.
When asked to provide his cab number, Mr Young gave five digits instead of four, which Mr Innes knew to be a false number, the court heard. Mr Innes then reported the cabbie to the Department of Transport, which launched the prosecution.
Access All AreasHouse of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs’ report Access All Areas — Government Response
In December 2008, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs received terms of reference to consider and report on the draft Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards.
On Monday 15 June 2009, the Standing Committee tabled its report entitled Access All Areas.
The Government’s response was tabled on Monday 15 March 2010.
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
The Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards will achieve more consistent, systemic and widespread improvements in non-discriminatory access for people with disability to publicly accessible buildings.
All new buildings will be required to have adequate disabled access under new broad standards aimed at evening things up for the disabled community.
The scheme has been lauded as an unprecedented move opening the door to those with a disability, giving them greater access to employment, services and the community as a whole.
For the first time in Australia, the Standards for Access to Premises – as announced by the federal government on Monday – sets minimum access requirements for buildings.
It covers stairs, ramps, toilets and corridors and will apply to all new office buildings, shops, hotels, B&Bs and even the common areas of apartment blocks.
The new rules apply from May 1, 2011.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland said the standards were about addressing the “practical realities of what can reasonably be required and enforced”.
Existing buildings will also be compelled to make accessibility changes under the proposal, although only if there’s significant upgrade work being undertaken.
Exclusions, meanwhile, also apply for those who cannot fulfil the requirements because it would cause “unjustifiable hardship” – a move that has won the support of Australia’s peak construction body.
Code opens doors to disabledSHOPS, hotels and offices will soon be forced to widen corridors, install ramps and renovate toilets under new rules to improve access for the elderly, disabled and families with prams.
The Rudd government will today announce minimum access requirements for public buildings built or renovated from May 1 next year.
For the first time, uniform building rules will be mandated across Australia to end the isolation felt by as many as 4 million people who cannot use many public facilities. These go beyond buildings – to swimming pools and cinemas.
Disability discrimination commissioner Graeme Innes, who is blind, said the rules were ”the biggest building reforms for people with disabilities in Australia’s history”.
”As a person with a disability I feel pleased our society is moving to fully include me,” he said.
The rules will also apply to common areas of rental apartment blocks.
Parliamentary secretary for disabilities Bill Shorten said the laws would help end years of ”practical apartheid” excluding people with disabilities.
”If you couldn’t enter a building because of your skin colour or gender, there’d be a human outcry. Yet everyday, people with disabilities have that sort of embarrassment,” he said.
The Minister for the Olympics and Paralympics, Tessa Jowell, has launched London 2012: A legacy for disabled people, which aims to use the Olympic and Paralympic Games as a catalyst to boost the numbers of disabled people participating in sport, as well as to improve transport systems, provide better employment opportunities and change attitudes. As part of the scheme, Sport England has announced £3.5 million of funding to the English Federation of Disability Sport (EFDS) to help it deliver a new strategy to increase participation and opportunities for disabled people.
Sport England also announced that it will be making £2 million of targeted National Lottery funding available, by application, to nine disability sports organizations including: British Blind Sport, Mencap Sport, Wheelpower and the Special Olympics. A further £8 million of National Lottery funding has also been ring-fenced by Sport England for investment in sport for disabled people over the next two
years. Tessa Jowell said: ‘We want the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games to showcase a Britain without barriers. By working to increase sports participation, improve employment opportunities amongst disabled people and develop a greater appreciation of disability issues in society, our legacy plan for disabled people aims to make a real difference to the way disabled people live their lives every day.’
Workplace Law has published this briefing, which considers the question of ‘reasonable adjustments’. The paper cites the disability discrimination case of The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and others v. Wilson, in which the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the Employment Tribunal had adopted the wrong approach on the question of reasonable adjustments.
The correct approach was first to consider whether making the adjustment would overcome the disadvantage suffered by the disabled person and then to consider the other factors. Authors Karen Plumbley-Jones and Rachel Jones of Bond Pearce LLP look at the disability discrimination claim and examine how far employers have to go to meet their requirements under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA).
To download the briefing, visit the Workplace Law Network website
www.workplacelaw.net/news/display/id/26874
contact us