Smart Floors Enhance Accessibility of Airports for Passengers with Disabilities

Dear Colleagues,

The below article by Marisa Garcia of Skift brings into light how graphic floors can help people with visual disabilities particularly those with impairments of depth perception. This can be replicated at all public spaces particularly  Transportation Buildings or interchange stations for Bus, Rail, Metros, etc. and Other Buildings such as malls, institutions, universities etc. Here goes the article covering the smart floor tiles at Edmonton International Airport.

The striking graphic floor tiles of Edmonton International Airport compliment the terminal’s distinctive modern appearance, but they're far more beautiful than that. What might appear to other passengers as a decorative contrast of graduated color tiles, was designed to help visually impaired passengers better judge the distance to their gate.

“Some Visually-Impaired passengers may have poor depth perception,” explains Heather Hamilton, Spokesperson for Edmonton International Airport. “They can’t judge the distance to their gate with a long monochrome flooring in the terminal hall. The distance varied tiles of the floor we installed, with its skinny strips graduated along the length of the terminal, let’s you focus your eye on the lower shelves and better judge the distance to the check-in counters. The two different color insets of grey and blue also make it easier to judge the distance ahead.”

Edmonton International Airport’s Floor Tiles Help Visually Impaired Passengers With Way-finding/Edmonton Airport (photo credit skift.com)

The decision to install this unique feature is part of Edmonton International Airport’s social commitment to travelers and to the local community. “We met with members of the community to get feedback on how we could improve our Terminal for all passengers,” says Hamilton. Helping passengers with limited depth-perception find their way through the Terminal better was one of the suggestions which came out of these meetings. “We have the same pattern worked into the carpet in our office tower. In the office carpet, the texture carpet and the height of the pile serve the same purpose.”

Awareness is growing in the travel sector, including at airports and airlines, about the importance of Universal Design. This is design which considers the needs of all and makes products and environments attractive, functional and accessible. Think OXO.

Edmonton International Airport’s Graphic Pattern on Floor Helps Visually Impaired Passengers with Way-Finding/Edmonton Airport (photo credit skift.com)

Laurel Van Horn, Director of Programs and Editor for the Open Doors Organization, and the former executive director of SATH (Society for Accessible Travel and Hospitality), is an advocate of design which meets the needs of all travelers. The mission of the Open Doors Organization is to share insights into the needs of elderly and disabled travelers, targeting areas of improvement and carrying out accessibility initiatives.  As she explains, airport terminals are actively looking for ways to ensure passengers with disabilities and the elderly can better navigate our ever-expanding international terminal cities.

“Without a question, airports around the world are becoming more and more accessible,” Van Horn says. “This is true even in countries where little accessibility exists outside the airport. But are they becoming more usable or functional, especially as they grow in size? Most people who need wheelchair assistance in airports never use a wheelchair in their everyday lives but they can’t manage those huge distances.  Even those who can manage the walk may need an escort to find their gate because the way-finding and signage is so complex in these huge, multi-level terminals. This is where Universal Design can play a role.”

Source: Skift.com 

DGCA fails to respond to Disability Discrimination Notice from Court of CCPD

Dear Friends,

Our colleague Dr. Satendra Singh was invited to speak at the International Conference on Evidence in Global Disability and Health’ jointly organised by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Public Health Foundation of India at Hyderabad in Feb 2014. While returning, he was shocked by the lack of empathy of the security staff at the Rajiv Gandhi International Airport.

He harassed at the Hyderabad International airport by security officials who insisted that Mr. Singh removed his orthosis for security check.  Incidentally, Dr. Satendra Singh, who teaches at the University College of Medical Sciences, Delhi University, has post-polio residual paralysis and uses a knee-foot-ankle-orthosis (KFAO) also called a caliper or brace, for support to allow independent mobility.

Dr. Satendra Singh, Disability Activist

He told the security officials that it is difficult for him to take off his orthosis during travel and again put it back. He expressed solidarity with the security requirements and requested the security officials (CISF staff) to screen him with ETD (Explosives Trace Detector Test) or do a manual frisking but they were hell bent on removal of the orthosis only.

It may pertinent to mention that the Security SOPs (standing operating procedures) by BCAS clearly state that removal of prosthesis is not necessary.  After, Dr. Singh, a medical doctor himself,  did not budge, knowing his rights very well, the security officials had no option but to organise the ETD scanning and he could take his flight back. 

On March 10, Dr. Singh had complained to Mr. Arvind Ranjan, Director General, CISF (Central Industrial Security Force), BCAS (Bureau of Civil Aviation Security), the Ministry of Civil Aviation, Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)  and the Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (CCPD).

CISF considering the sensitivities of the issue, organised a workshop on 'soft skills' for handling disabled passengers on 30 March 2014 where it was invited Dr. Singh to share his views on frisking of people with disabilities. Top CISF and Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) officials were also present at the session. Post the workshop, the BCAS has issued a revised SOP which is up on its website.

However, the DGCA & Ministry of Civil Aviation did not respond to even the notices issued by the Court of CCPD despite lapse of 30 days time which indicated the callousness shown by them on the subject of dignity during travel for persons with disabilities. 

Speaking to reduced mobility rights, Dr. Singh said, "I have submitted my rejoinder requesting Court to make sure both DGCA and BCAS amend their rustic screening rules, modify guidelines taking UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities into consideration."

We hope with the change in guard at the centre, under the able leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, things will fall into place and the lackadaisical attitude will be shunned by the Ministry and it will ensure that no such incident ever happens with any person with disability.

The matter is pending adjudication in the court of CCPD. More updates once the court passes its final order/ judgement!

Media Coverage on the issue

Times of India, 15 Sep 2014 DGCA given 30 days to prove disabled not harassed

Reduced Mobility Rights, 03 Oct 2014  India Civil Aviation Misses Court of CCPD Notice Deadline On Frisking

The Hindu, 26 Feb 2014 Harassed at Hyderabad Airport, said Disability Activist

The Enablist (Blog)/ Times of India:   Airlines can't refuse to fly differently abled 

Insensitivity of Air India towards disabled on display

Dear Friends,

If we go by the incident reported below, then this is another display of insensitivity by the airliners towards travellers with disabilities for Air India has openly expressed that it doesn't accept passengers with any mental disability or challenge or with autism. Here is the coverage by DNA.

No air travel for the mentally challenged?

Baishali Adak, Jul 11, 2014, DHNS :

Concerning issue

In yet another case of violation of rules regarding ‘air transportation of the disabled’ and sheer insensitivity, a woman with an autistic child was recently told by Air India staff that they “do not accept passengers with any mental disability/challenge/autism.”

 Though she took up the matter with the board of directors, Air India, and they wrote back to her saying that the incident will be investigated, there was no word of assurance that her son will be allowed to fly with the airline in future.

With several such cases  having surfaced in the past, the present case again points to gaps in implementation of guidelines set in this regard by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) combined with lack of staff training. All of this ends up inconveniencing the differently abled who are already burdened by various problems on a daily basis.

Nikita Sarah, head, Advocacy and Communication, The Leprosy Mission Trust India, called up the Air India Customer Support on June 21 to enquire about facilities and discounts, if any, available for the differently abled. To her shock, she was told that Air India does not carry passengers with any mental disability at all. When she requested the call to be transferred to a superior, the manager reiterated the stand. The same day she e-mailed the Board of Directors, Air India, and they responded with an apology and a promise to “look into the matter and revert”. Sarah is yet to hear from them.

Not a one-off incident

Disability rights activists inform us this is not a case in isolation. A few years back, a prominent film actor from the south, Prithviraj, had to face a similar situation when his son was denied entry into the Bangalore airport. The security staff insisted that “his son was a security threat to other passengers.” In 2012, Jeeja Ghosh, director of Advocacy and Disability Studies at the Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy, was forced to deboard a private airline at Kolkata airport when the staff made a wrongful demand for a ‘fitness certificate.’

Javed Abidi, chairperson of Disabled People’s International (DPI), says, “It is surprising if such an incident has occurred. It is not that people with physical or mental disabilities do not travel by air. I know such persons who fly by Air India all the time, but it’s an example of airlines today not investing in training their staff properly. This has specifically been stressed upon in the DGCA guidelines on travel for people with disabilities.”

“If you look at countries like US and Britain, you will rarely ever find such instances because a single such remark or insensitive conduct sparks lawsuits.”

Merry Barua, Founder Director of Action for Autism (AFA), adds, “It is really hypocritical that when drunk passengers get on board and make scenes, or when politicians throw their weight around, the staff does nothing. But when an autistic child makes noises, people get all officious and devise their own rules.”

Ministry’s take

Though Air India officials could not be reached despite several attempts, when Metrolife spoke to Poonam Natarajan, chairperson, National Trust, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, she said, “It is very disheartening to hear this. 

Unfortunately, such incidents keep occurring inspite of repeated clarifications that the mentally and physically challenged have a right to fly. I will find out from the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Air India why this is recurring and how it can be put to an end.”  

Source: Deccan Herald

Low Cost Airline IndiGo to provide dedicated stairlifts for passengers with special needs

Dear Friends,

Today, IndiGo Airlines has become the first airlines in India with dedicated stairlifts for passengers with special needs. At airports around the country that do not use ramps, IndiGo will be introducing these motorised chairs that enable passengers to board and deplane in complete comfort! 

This is no doubt a welcome step as it will help many elders and those passengers with disabilities who can transfer easily on their own but this still fails to address the needs of those who are in wheelchairs and have problems in transfers. The ramped access patented by Indigo is a better option any day where everyone walks up in an inclusive way irrespective of being  a walker or the one being pushed on manual wheelchairs by the ground service providers! Hope this facility would be in addition to that and not as a replacement to the ramps.  

So congratulations to the Low Cost Airliner and to those who would benefit from this service which is of course coming at no added cost!

57 Traffic Lights now blind friendly after auditory devices installed

As a result of a PIL pending in the Delhi High Court, the Delhi Traffic Police informed the Delhi high court that they have installed 57 auditory devices at traffic signals in the capital for safety of visually impaired people.

In his reply, filed before a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, deputy commissioner of traffic police also informed that 35 more locations have been identified for providing auditory signals.

"... Traffic police has provided 857 traffic signals and 401 traffic blinkers all over Delhi for ensuring smooth flow of traffic and safety of pedestrians and other road users. A total of 57 traffic signals have been provided with auditory devices for the safety of visually handicapped persons. In addition, 35 locations have also been identified for providing auditory signals," the reply filed through Rupinder Kumar, deputy commissioner of traffic police, said.

"Besides... on roads where there is continuous flow of traffic, 22 pelican traffic signals and 36 pedestrian traffic signals are functional which have the facility to provide adequate time in the signal cycle to pedestrians for safely crossing the roads. Additionally, 96 signals with pedestrian aspects have been installed and it is envisaged to provide pedestrian aspects on nearly all the signals," the official said.

The police's reply came after the court in March had issued notice to the Delhi government and civic agencies on a plea seeking direction to provide parking space to the physically challenged near the entrances of public buildings in line with the Master Plan Delhi 2021. The bench had also asked the traffic police, police commissioner and DDA to file responses.

The DCP also said that regular action is taken by traffic police to remove illegal parking. He added that the traffic police prosecuted 7,10,025 people in 2013 and 2,96,232 in 2014 till April 30. The official also stated that action is also being taken against second-hand car dealers, who are causing encroachment on the roads of the capital.

The official said that the department had launched a special drive on May 6 in coordination with the civic agencies for removal of encroachment "on specially identified 11 vital corridors in the NCT of Delhi, in which 567 encroachments have been removed, action has been taken against 180 vendors, 159 vehicles have been towed away, 1047 vehicles have been challaned and 145 notices for obstructive parking have been issued. The drive shall continue on a regular basis".

A PIL filed by social worker Vinod Kumar Bansal, through advocates Anupam Srivastava and Sitab Ali Chaudhary, had sought the court's direction to the Delhi government and civic agencies to install auditory signals at red lights on public roads for physically handicapped people. The plea further sought directions to make pavements wheelchair-friendly.

Source: Times of India

Train with 20 Braille friendly coaches in the 100 days agenda of Indian Railways

Dear Colleagues,

Railways will launch a new train with all its coaches equipped with Braille-embedded signages on berths, toilets, wash basins and doors as part of the 100-day agenda being finalised by the national transporter.

Flagging off train to Katra, long awaited for clearance from Railway Commissioner for Safety, too is on the agenda.

Launching of the 20-coach train with Braille signages, a first of its kind, for facilitating visually-impaired passengers, will be part of the Railway's 100-day agenda to be submitted to PMO shortly, a senior Railway Ministry official said today.

The visually-impaired-friendly coaches in both AC and Sleeper classes were made on the basis of inputs received from Research Designs and Standards Organisation, Railways' research arm, and in consultation with associations for the blind.

The long-awaited train service to Katra, the base camp of Vaishno Devi shrine in Jammu and Kashmir, will soon be a reality as the Railways is gearing up to make the 25-km long Udhampur-Katra rail line operational shortly.

"The commissioning of the Udhampur-Katra line is likely to be part of the 100-day agenda," the official involved with finalising the agenda said.

Getting down to business, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has asked all his Cabinet colleagues to set a 100-day agenda with focus on efficient governance, delivery and implementation of programmes.

Source: Business Standard

International Law fails to protect rights of Disabled Persons when travelling by air

Dear Colleagues,

The instant judgement of the Supreme Court of England, titled Stott (Appellant) v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd (Respondents) [2014] UKSC 15  stresses that even though European law can protect disability rights, where it conflicts with international convention, the international convention will prevail, not the European legislation. The case highlights the need to revisit the Montreal Convention, since this convention was drafted in an era when disability advocacy wasn't firmed in the policy framework as it exist today.  The Court though accepted that there was a breach of duty on the part of respondents, however, since the international convention did not provide for the kind of relief of damages sought on the grounds of disability discrimination, the same could not be granted.

The respondents argued that the Montreal Convention (“the Convention”), an international treaty which governs the liability of air carriers in international carriage by air, precluded a damages award for injury to feelings. Under Articles 17 and 29 of the Convention, damages can only be awarded for harm to passengers in cases of death or bodily injury.

Brief of the Case:

Mr and Mrs Stott decided to take a holiday in Zante, Greece, in September 2008. Mr Stott is paralysed from the shoulders down and a permanent wheelchair user. He has double incontinence and uses a catheter. When travelling by air, he depends on his wife to manage his incontinence, help him to eat, and change his sitting position.

Mr Stott booked return flights with Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd (“Thomas Cook”), a tour operator and air carrier. He telephoned Thomas Cook’s helpline twice, informing them that he had paid to be seated with his wife, and was assured that this would happen. However, on arrival at check-in for the return journey, Mr and Mrs Stott were told that they would not be seated together. They protested, but were eventually told that the seat allocations could not be changed.

Mr Stott had difficulties in boarding the aircraft, and was not sufficiently assisted by Thomas Cook staff. He felt extremely embarrassed, humiliated, and angry. He was eventually helped into his seat, with his wife sitting behind him. This arrangement was problematic, since Mrs Stott could not properly assist her husband during the three hour and twenty minute flight. She had to kneel or crouch in the aisle to attend to his personal needs, obstructing the cabin crew and other passengers. The cabin crew made no attempt to ease their difficulties.

Mr Stott, assisted by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, brought a claim under the Civil Aviation (Access to Air Travel for Disabled Persons and Persons with Reduced Mobility) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/1895) (“the UK Regulations”), which implement EC disability rights regulations (“the EC Regulations”). The UK Regulations enable civil proceedings in UK courts for breaches of the EC Regulations, and state that compensation awarded may include sums for injury to feelings. The EC Regulations require Community air carriers (among other things) to make reasonable efforts to provide accompanying persons with a seat next to a disabled person. Mr Stott claimed that Thomas Cook had breached this duty, and sought a declaration and damages for injury to his feelings.

Thomas Cook argued that it had made reasonable efforts and that the Montreal Convention (“the Convention”), an international treaty which governs the liability of air carriers in international carriage by air, precluded a damages award for injury to feelings. Under Articles 17 and 29 of the Convention, damages can only be awarded for harm to passengers in cases of death or bodily injury.

The judge at trial found that Thomas Cook had breached the UK Regulations, and made a declaration to that effect. However, he held that the Convention prevented him from making any damages award to Mr Stott. The Court of Appeal agreed. Mr Stott appealed, arguing that his claim was (i) outside the substantive scope of the Convention, since the Convention did not touch the issue of equal access to air travel which are governed by the EC Regulations and (ii) outside the temporal scope of the Convention, since Thomas Cook’s failure to make all reasonable efforts began before Mr and Mrs Stott boarded the aircraft. He relied on EU cases discussing a different EU Regulation which required compensation and assistance for The passengers in the event of cancellations and delays: the European Court had held that this Regulation was not incompatible with the Convention. The Secretary of State for Transport intervened to support Mr Stott’s claim on the second (temporal) ground.

The Judgement

The Supreme Court of England unanimously dismisses the appeal. The judgment of the Court is given by Lord Toulson, with a concurring judgment by Lady Hale. Mr Stott was treated in a humiliating and disgraceful manner by Thomas Cook. However, his claim falls within the substantive and temporal scope of the Convention, and as a result damages cannot be awarded for injury to feelings. Substantively, the Convention deals comprehensively with the carrier’s liability for physical incidents involving passengers between embarkation and disembarkation. The fact that Mr Stott’s claim involves an EU law right makes no difference. Temporally, Mr Stott’s claim is for damages and distress suffered in the course of embarkation and flight, and these fall squarely within the temporal scope of the Convention. It is not enough that the operative causes began prior to boarding.

Reasons for the Judgement

The only true question in the case is whether Mr Stott’s claim falls within the scope of the Montreal Convention. There is no dispute between Mr Stott and Thomas Cook as to the interpretation of the EC Regulations or UK Regulations, or their compatibility with the Convention. The EU cases do not assist: that other Regulation concerned general standardised measures, and the European Court had recognised that any claim for individualised damages would be subject to the Convention. The case raised no question of European law [54-59].
On substantive scope: the Convention was intended to deal comprehensively with the liability of the air carrier for whatever might physically happen to passengers between embarkation or disembarkation. The fact that Mr Stott’s claim relates to disability discrimination makes no difference. The underlying difficulty is that the Montreal Convention and its predecessors long predated equality laws. It is unfair that someone suffering as Mr Stott had could not obtain any compensation, but that is the plain meaning of the Convention. It would be desirable for the states parties to the Convention to consider its amendment. It is also possible that the Civil Aviation Authority could take other enforcement actions against Thomas Cook [61-64].
On temporal scope: the operative causes of Mr Stott’s treatment undoubtedly began at check-in, prior to embarkation. However, this is not enough. Mr Stott’s claim is for damages for the humiliation and distress that Mr Stott had suffered during the course of the flight, which fall squarely within the Convention period of exclusivity. To hold otherwise would encourage deft pleading and would circumvent the purpose of the Convention [60].
In her concurring judgment, Lady Hale considers it disturbing that the Convention excludes damages claims for breaches of individuals’ fundamental rights. It is particularly unsettling that this applies not only to private air carriers such as Thomas Cook, but also to state airlines. A treaty which contravened a fundamental international law norm would be void. Torture is a fundamental norm of this kind, and race discrimination might be another. There is a respectable view that Mr Stott’s treatment would, under the European Convention on Human Rights, constitute inhuman and degrading treatment (“IDT”). However, it appears that IDT has not yet become a fundamental international law norm. Since Thomas Cook is not a state air carrier, these issues do not arise in this case. At the very least, however, the grave injustice done to those in Mr Stott’s position should be addressed by the parties to the Convention [67-70].


Related Review by Ms. Catherine Leech  

Disabled persons’ rights not protected by International Law when travelling by air

A recent case in the Supreme Court has demonstrated that in some circumstances, even though European law can protect disability rights, where it conflicts with international convention, the international convention will prevail, not the European legislation.

The claimant in this case, Mr Stott, had booked with Thomas Cook to fly to Zante and had telephoned their helpline to ask and advise that he paid to sit next to his wife so that she could assist him during the flight. He was assured that they would be seated together. However, when they arrived at check-in, they were told that it would not be possible. Upon boarding the aircraft, Mr Stott's wheelchair overturned but he didn't receive appropriate assistance. He was then seated in front of his wife, which made it difficult for her to assist him. Relying on European law [Civil Aviation (Access to Air Travel for Disabled Persons and Persons with Reduced Mobility) Regulations 2007] Mr Stott argued that Thomas Cook were in breach of its duty in their efforts to give his wife a seat next to him. The judge accepted that they had breached their duty, but that unfortunately the regulations, which are part of European law, were incompatible with the more powerful International treaty [Montréal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air 1999}. Consequently, the judge was unable to make an award of damages because the Montréal Convention permits an award of damages, only in very specific and defined circumstances, which would not include this disability discrimination and hurt to his feelings.

Hearing the case, the Supreme Court concluded that the Montréal Convention was indeed the piece of law that trumped all others in respect of an event which occurred on an aircraft, between embarkation and disembarkation, in the course of aviation transport. Once the Montréal Convention is the governing law, the court in England (and Europe) cannot look beyond that to other pieces of legislation, which are not international. To provide a remedy on the basis of current law is impossible. It would need the Convention to be amended.

The Supreme Court held that the claim for damages for failing to properly provide for the needs of the disabled passenger was not envisaged by the convention, but because it occurred in the course of aviation travel, which the convention covers. The convention being intended to deal comprehensively with the liability of the air carrier for anything that physically might happen to passengers between embarkation and disembarkation, was not open to the court to find a way round the convention for this claimant. They agreed that it seemed unfair that Mr Stott or somebody like him who suffered ill-treatment of the kind, should be denied compensation and the fact that they had declared the air carrier in breach, was a small comfort. The underlying problem, however, is that the predecessor of the Montréal Convention, which was the Warsaw Convention dating back to the 1920s, long predated equality law and therefore this type of situation was never envisaged in the original drafting. The Supreme Court said that there was a good argument to say the convention should now be amended to take into account the development of equality rights, but any amendment would have to be agreed by all of the contracting parties internationally.

The Montréal Convention requires revisiting. Because of its antiquated origins, it is out of touch with modern society. Not only excluding appropriate remedies in respect of disabled passengers, even where (as in this case) the court identifies that the carrier has treated the passenger inappropriately, but it also excludes claims in respect of the sort of psychological harm, which has long been recognised medically. It provides an exclusive remedy, that in failing to address issues which are excluded from the convention, it provides no remedy at all and denies access to justice for various classes of genuine claimants to suffer a genuine wrong. It is surely time for this piece of legislation to be given a complete overhaul. The origins of the Montréal Convention are almost 100 years old. In this time, travel has expanded and increased beyond measure and society has developed an increasing sophistication with regard to psychiatric injury and human rights in general. An international convention which excludes a remedy to genuinely affected individuals, is not worth the paper it is written on. This is definitely something we should lobby politicians to revisit.

For Mr Stott, it is scant comfort for the Supreme Court and the courts lower down, to confirm that he has been inappropriately treated. The airlines will know that they are untouchable in law, however inappropriately they may treat disabled people or people with reduced mobility. One thing that is clear in other aspects of personal injury law, whether this relates to employers liability or clinical negligence, is the increase in safety for the public and an awareness, before accidents happen, as people are aware that negligent mistakes will be actioned, making processes such as risk assessments, essential. The absence of any effective sanction, which is the effect that this judgement has had where the airlines are concerned, is a disincentive for them to treat such passengers with appropriate respect and consideration. 

Read more .......Disabled persons’ rights not protected by International Law when travelling by air