DDA
DDA - sword or a poking stick?
February 5th 2010 - The day it all started.
On Friday the 5th of February, 2010, I entered Waterstones to purchase a travel book at 19 Earl Street. I was accompanied by my personal assistant (PA/carer). The travel section was located on a split level with stair access. On asking a member of staff at the till how I could get up to that level, she directed me to 'the accessible entrance' around the outside of the building. [The building is on a slight hill].
On leaving the store I located the second entrance which had a large step [left]. I have Muscular Dystrophy and use an electric wheelchair due to limited limb movement. As such, I was unable to access this level. I sent my PA back into the shop to ask about a ramp for this step but she came back and told me there was no ramp.
On re-entering the store I spoke to the same member of staff who said that "other people manage".
How I felt
I was made to feel an inconvenience and bothersome customer which caused me great distress. I was also uncomfortable about having to express my frustration in-between the staff member serving other people. No attempt was made to find out if staff could have helped (e.g. locating a book from that level for me etc). I said I had rights under the Disability Discrimination Act and wanted to speak with the manager. She replied that she didn't know anything about the DDA and that there was no one I could speak to. I repeated that I wanted to see someone and she said there was no ramp because of the building being listed.
I felt she was not listening to me and treating me with the respect that other customers would receive. I was then told the manager was in and on an upper floor. Feeling deceived and insulted I went upstairs and a helpful member of staff called to see where the manager was (in another branch) and offered me his e-mail address.
February 9th 2010 - Next steps.
I phoned the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and a very helpful person went through the questions to see if I had a case for discrimination. Once he knew that I met the requirements (i.e. was disabled by the definition of the DDA) he gave me my case number and advice to start down the route that is usual. This meant clearly explaining what had happened to the manager and seeking a response to a template list of questions provided by the EHRC within 14 days, recorded delivery.
February 13th 2010
My letter was confirmed to have been received by the assistant manager who said that he had passed my letter to their DDA expert which should enable a portable ramp.
February 18th 2010
The manager confirms sight of my letter and writes to me. [Click here to see letter 1]
Step 2 - Raise it up a notch
April 8th 2010 - no further response so I moved to official proceedings.
I phoned the EHRC and they sent me the paper work for the next step.
April 9th - I served documents to Waterstones 'Questions Procedure'
Using the Questions Procedure can help a disabled person:
- decide whether or not to bring legal proceedings in the county court in England and Wales, or sheriff court in Scotland; and
- present his or her complaint to the court in the most effective way.
A question in a questionnaire and any reply by a defendant is admissible in evidence in court if the claimant’s questionnaire is ‘served on’ (sent to) the defendant.
April 15th
I receive a letter from the manager. He said
"Waterstones as a company has undertaken a full survey of all of its branches to ascertain how they meet the needs of its disabled customers. It has a list of work to be done, with those branches with the most shopfloor space that is inaccessible at the top of the list. The Earl Street Branch in Maidstone is some way down the list, with approximately 10% of space inaccessible. Waterstones as a Company is committed to acting on as soon as possible as many of these issues as it can, given the current financial situation of the Company
We have decided as a Branch not to wait, and to act straight away to change the situation.Your experience has prompted us to review the use of the back of our Ground Floor as a sales area. As a result of this review we have decided no longer to use this as a shopfloor area and to close it off, relocating those sections to other more accessible parts of the Branch. We are looking to do this work in June 2010."
This very cleverly dodged the key question in the papers that were served where they can declare that they did indeed act unlawfully (or they can say they didn't and explain why it was lawful).
I didn't really want to go to court - I just wanted them to hold their hands up and say 'what we did was unlawful, discriminatory and we apologise'. I hadn't had this part of my question answered.
April 26th - Seeking the answers to the papers that were served.
I e-mailed to remind them they had not answered the specific question form the questionnaire. Did they agree they had failed to make reasonable adjustment and provided a service in a worse manner because I was a disabled person? Had they failed to train their staff adequately?
I started making enquiries about legal action - it could cost me over £1000 to get a judge to make them respond and it didn't look hopeful I would be entitled to legal aid type support.
June 4th 2010 - I received an e-mail to say their response was in the post - the papers came back, completed, on the day of the 8 week response deadline.
They agreed with my statement of what happened and how they discriminated against me by failing in a range of different ways. I had what I wanted and the alterations to the building were due to start a few weeks ago.
There are still thousands of stores, of all kinds, who won't make reasonable adjustments until they receive a complaint. Even things which are relatively cheap and quick to action - like the portable ramp and a friendly member of staff who had been trained in disability equality AND the DDA. Training is not just a few hours on 'how to communicate' and a top ten crib sheet about dealing with customers who have impairments (which is what this member of staff got). Attitude is a huge thing and just good old customer service! Smiles are free for example.
So all in all - it gave them a poke but it is not the mighty sword that will get Waterstones thinking about all their other stores on a 'waiting list' for action.
I certainly will never shop there again and I will share my story with others so they can decide where they buy their next book from.
A vote or a sympathy vote?
07/April/2010 01:51 PM Filed in: Other
However, will they have the right attitude to get the attention of the disabled voter - or will we just get the sympathy vote from them?
Up close in person - patronising attitudes and accessibility of MPs.
One of the things I have had experience of is lobbying an MP - and that was not pleasant. It was some years ago in St Albans. Myself and some people from a Direct Payment Support Scheme went to a surgery appointment to discuss the Independent Living Funds' 'toilet tax'. As a wheelchair user, when we arrived the surgery wasn't exactly accessible. It involved going up a step, round the side of the building on a crumbling narrow path, through a back kitchen and into a cramped office for all of a ten minute chat.
Access to MPs and similar should be equally available to all but I wonder how many actually are?
Shocking attitudes of MPs and Councillors
About 4 or 5 years ago, I had the displeasure of meeting Ann Widdecombe as my local MP. I was working at the event where she was doing a speech to launch a disability product. There were a number of disabled people with a range of impairments. I had no idea what she would be like - but as she did her meet and greet I soon found out. She bent down, stared closely at me, then studied my chair, then turned again to look at me. In a fiery, shrill breath she bellowed 'so whats wrong with YOU then'. I was stunned.
Do politicians not get any equality training on how to respectfully go about their duties? It's something I will remember for the rest of my life because the conversation didn't get much better despite my efforts to say I was actually working at the event and politely trying to move the conversation away from which parts of me don't work. My work colleagues were horrified and word soon spread! I watched how she did the same with everyone else with an obvious impairment, patronising and shameful.
I have met many councillors and have been utterly horrified at the patronising behaviours and language demonstrated on all but one occasion. Invalids and a pat on the head in some cases.
So - if you treat me in this way, with disrespect and inequality, you should not be surprised when this reflects badly on your party.
You will understand when I say that you probably don't care much for what the disabled members of your community need and the rights that should be theirs when you don't make any effort yourself to get it right.
Do you want my vote or not?
Premier accessibility
When is an accessible Premier Inn not an accessible
Premier Inn?
Answer: When you phone and talk to staff at Poole North about accessible rooms.
I don’t normally question the accessibility of rooms in these types of places. However, having stayed at so many either for short breaks, work or visiting family, I know that no two are the same.
Sometimes it is a subtle difference or a difference that determines my personal level of access (like not needing to take so much disability equipment if I can transfer to the loo on one particular side).
Something made me query the sink (in which I would be washing hair and so on) as to whether it was built into a wall, built into a unit or was free standing to get underneath and up close from my wheelchair.
My husband called first and the person on the desk said they were built in... followed by ‘oh no, I don’t think so in the disabled rooms’. The moment the person gave me reason to doubt, prompted a second phone call the next day for a second opinion. This person also didn’t fill me with confidence.
Staff couldn’t provide a photo of the bathroom which would have cleared up the query once and for all so I had to enlist my brother, who was in that area this week, to visit and take a look himself (and take some photos). Of course, it was good of staff to let him do that but what would have been much easier is to see a picture of the rooms and layout. A cheap and easy solution that would have meant minimum inconvenience for all concerned and increased their standard of customer care.
Just having ‘accessible rooms’ is really not enough because different layouts pose different barriers for different people and a picture could really help resolve a customer’s query.
I believe photographs of accessible rooms, holiday cottages etc should be a minimum part of any disability standard because disabled people don’t always fit the ’accessibility standard’ box.
Answer: When you phone and talk to staff at Poole North about accessible rooms.
I don’t normally question the accessibility of rooms in these types of places. However, having stayed at so many either for short breaks, work or visiting family, I know that no two are the same.
Sometimes it is a subtle difference or a difference that determines my personal level of access (like not needing to take so much disability equipment if I can transfer to the loo on one particular side).
Something made me query the sink (in which I would be washing hair and so on) as to whether it was built into a wall, built into a unit or was free standing to get underneath and up close from my wheelchair.
My husband called first and the person on the desk said they were built in... followed by ‘oh no, I don’t think so in the disabled rooms’. The moment the person gave me reason to doubt, prompted a second phone call the next day for a second opinion. This person also didn’t fill me with confidence.
Staff couldn’t provide a photo of the bathroom which would have cleared up the query once and for all so I had to enlist my brother, who was in that area this week, to visit and take a look himself (and take some photos). Of course, it was good of staff to let him do that but what would have been much easier is to see a picture of the rooms and layout. A cheap and easy solution that would have meant minimum inconvenience for all concerned and increased their standard of customer care.
Just having ‘accessible rooms’ is really not enough because different layouts pose different barriers for different people and a picture could really help resolve a customer’s query.
I believe photographs of accessible rooms, holiday cottages etc should be a minimum part of any disability standard because disabled people don’t always fit the ’accessibility standard’ box.
Bank guilty of discrimination.
Yesterday, the Royal Bank of Scotland had to pay the
highest compensation payout of its kind to a 17 year
old wheelchair user.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission took on the case when the person had been unable to gain access to the bank in Sheffield.
The bank were ordered to install a lift for wheelchair users and the man was awarded £6,500 for embarrassing treatment.
----
I went to a HSBC bank once (only one that was near to me) and couldn’t get in because of a step. I eventually got a member of staff to do my transaction outside, on the pavement in the pouring rain and freezing cold. My case was virtually identical to this one.
This is our reality.
---
The Equality and Human Rights Commission took on the case when the person had been unable to gain access to the bank in Sheffield.
The bank were ordered to install a lift for wheelchair users and the man was awarded £6,500 for embarrassing treatment.
----
I went to a HSBC bank once (only one that was near to me) and couldn’t get in because of a step. I eventually got a member of staff to do my transaction outside, on the pavement in the pouring rain and freezing cold. My case was virtually identical to this one.
This is our reality.
---
Work - a negative experience.
Insight: Work fit for all - disability, health and
the experience of negative treatment in the British
workplace.
This is the title of a new publication by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
You can download this EHRC document here.
It explains how Britain (compared to other countries) has large numbers of disabled people with proportionately fewer in employment.
Incapacity Benefit claims have doubled in the past 20 years and the Government wants to reverse this trend.
So why aren’t disabled people getting jobs?
Research shows that disabled people perceive themselves as being subject to negative treatment at work - it is the fear of discrimination.
On a personal level, I can understand that when you are discriminated against time and time again in many parts of your life - why should work be any different?
Is this perception accurate?
Well, those surveyed who had attempted work agreed that negative treatment at work was experience and that for many it had made them ill (and many developed long term illness).
Negative behaviours and attitudes were not just from managers or supervisors - but work colleagues and customers.
What did the figure show:
25.4% of disabled people experienced intimidating behavior compared to 13.4% of those with no impairment.
14.4% received hints and signals that they should quit their job with only 8.7% of those with no impairment.
37.3% experience being shouted at or someone losing their temper with them compared to 25.9% of those with no impairment.
Disabled people felt more threatened, treated in a rude way or insulted, subject to gossip and experienced more physical violence.
In fact, disabled people experienced
More information:
For people with:
• A learning difficulty, psychological or emotional condition, the likelihood of negative experiences at work was increased by 167 per cent
• ‘Other’ conditions, the likelihood was increased by 128 per cent
• ‘Physical’ conditions the likelihood was increased by 3 per cent.
In contrast, other important variables were:
• Sexuality - being gay increased negative behaviour by 55 per cent.
Multiple oppression is an important factor where a mental health survivor who is gay could experience extremely damaging effects of work and may well be healthier if they were unemployed - something the government is now forced to contemplate in its ‘work is good for you, your community and the economy’ approach.
Employers - more needs to be done within businesses to end discrimination.
Employers will be asked, under possible amendments to legislation, to prevent illl-treatment and harassment of disabled people in the work place and promote dignity and respect.
This is the title of a new publication by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
You can download this EHRC document here.
It explains how Britain (compared to other countries) has large numbers of disabled people with proportionately fewer in employment.
Incapacity Benefit claims have doubled in the past 20 years and the Government wants to reverse this trend.
So why aren’t disabled people getting jobs?
Research shows that disabled people perceive themselves as being subject to negative treatment at work - it is the fear of discrimination.
On a personal level, I can understand that when you are discriminated against time and time again in many parts of your life - why should work be any different?
Is this perception accurate?
Well, those surveyed who had attempted work agreed that negative treatment at work was experience and that for many it had made them ill (and many developed long term illness).
Negative behaviours and attitudes were not just from managers or supervisors - but work colleagues and customers.
What did the figure show:
25.4% of disabled people experienced intimidating behavior compared to 13.4% of those with no impairment.
14.4% received hints and signals that they should quit their job with only 8.7% of those with no impairment.
37.3% experience being shouted at or someone losing their temper with them compared to 25.9% of those with no impairment.
Disabled people felt more threatened, treated in a rude way or insulted, subject to gossip and experienced more physical violence.
In fact, disabled people experienced
More information:
For people with:
• A learning difficulty, psychological or emotional condition, the likelihood of negative experiences at work was increased by 167 per cent
• ‘Other’ conditions, the likelihood was increased by 128 per cent
• ‘Physical’ conditions the likelihood was increased by 3 per cent.
In contrast, other important variables were:
• Sexuality - being gay increased negative behaviour by 55 per cent.
Multiple oppression is an important factor where a mental health survivor who is gay could experience extremely damaging effects of work and may well be healthier if they were unemployed - something the government is now forced to contemplate in its ‘work is good for you, your community and the economy’ approach.
Employers - more needs to be done within businesses to end discrimination.
Employers will be asked, under possible amendments to legislation, to prevent illl-treatment and harassment of disabled people in the work place and promote dignity and respect.
Employers get DDA advice
Disability
and Employment
“For the first time, this year’s Employer CD-ROM includes information on disability and employment.
Employing disabled people can help you to:
SOURCE: HMRC Employer’s Bulliten 29 issued April 2008
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employers-bulletin/bulletin29/disability-employment.htm
“For the first time, this year’s Employer CD-ROM includes information on disability and employment.
Employing disabled people can help you to:
- attract and keep skilled staff
- make your workforce more representative of the community it serves
- avoid undervaluing, under-using or losing skilled staff
- avoid the costs and uncertainties of recruiting someone new
- improve staff morale and productivity
- develop good practice
- help avoid claims of unlawful disability discrimination.”
SOURCE: HMRC Employer’s Bulliten 29 issued April 2008
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employers-bulletin/bulletin29/disability-employment.htm
American Express apologize for no alternative format
BBC Radio 4's Money Box was broadcast on Saturday, 5
April 2008 at 1204 BST.
In the programme the lack of alternative formats was addressed. This was in relation to American Express offering bank statements in PDF formats that were not coded for visually impaired people to read via their screen readers. The issue has still not been fixed and is causing difficulties for the many people who use screen readers (Blind and visually impaired people, those with reading impairments who listen to the spoke word and people with learning difficulties who may also find it easier hearing items rather than reading them.
This is unlawful under the DDA and American Express apologized to the BBC stating that they are working to fix the problem that began last December.
In the programme the lack of alternative formats was addressed. This was in relation to American Express offering bank statements in PDF formats that were not coded for visually impaired people to read via their screen readers. The issue has still not been fixed and is causing difficulties for the many people who use screen readers (Blind and visually impaired people, those with reading impairments who listen to the spoke word and people with learning difficulties who may also find it easier hearing items rather than reading them.
This is unlawful under the DDA and American Express apologized to the BBC stating that they are working to fix the problem that began last December.
