|
|
The Council for Disability Rights |
| Advancing rights and enhancing lives of people with disabilities |
|
CDR HOME |
March News
By Melanie Payne The California Supreme Court upheld Thursday the state’s broad interpretation of what it means to be disabled and entitled to protection against discrimination at work, a ruling that could open thousands of legal cases for re-examination.The ruling in Colmenares v. Braemar Country Club Inc. affirms that California’s definition of disability goes far beyond federal guidelines, which require that the worker be “substantially” limited in a life activity. California's statute omits that qualification, so individuals with a condition that affects a life or work function can be considered disabled. This definition will effectively eliminate arguments over whether an individual is disabled and therefore change how cases are litigated, legal scholars predicted. It ends up focusing the argument on whether an accommodation is reasonable and whether the worker can perform the job, said attorney Jim Nelson with Seyfarth Shaw in Sacramento. Lawyers representing employers said the state law is another example of how California earns its reputation for fostering an adverse climate for business. In this case, they say, California employers will see a bigger bite on their bottom lines because their costs for accommodating workers with disabilities will be higher than in other states. Plaintiffs’ attorneys were overjoyed by the Colmenares decision, noting that protections under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act have been eroding. … California Attorney General Bill Lockyer voiced a similar sentiment in a prepared statement. …Thursday’s decision will allow Francisco Colmenares to get his disability discrimination case reconsidered. Because of a 1981 back injury, Colmenares’ physician said he could do only light work on his job at the Braemar Country Club in the Tarzana area of Los Angeles. In 1997, however, a supervisor reassigned Colmenares to a job involving heavy labor and when he was unable to do the work, he was fired. Colmenares — who had worked for the country club for 25 years — sued, claiming the company failed to accommodate his disability. But a lower court ruled that Colmenares was not disabled because he didn't fit the federal definition of being “substantially limited in a major life activity.” The California Supreme Court ruled, however, that Colmenares’ disability should have been considered under the less restrictive language of the California law, known as the Fair Housing and Employment Act, even though that language wasn’t clear until a 2001 amendment. Because the court said the amendment was a clarification of the law and not a new rule, legal experts said, the state standard would apply to pending cases filed by Colmenares and other plaintiffs. Lawyers estimate this could affect thousands of lawsuits. … Catherine Corfee, an attorney with Cook Brown in Sacramento said that anti- discrimination law protects people in discrete categories — race, gender or sexual orientation — for example. “But the disability category is so loosey-goosey and over-broad that everyone falls into it. It's not a category anymore.” The US Supreme Court, on the other hand, has leaned in the other direction with a strict interpretation of disability. The federal standard is so high, said some legal experts, that if a person can prove that she is substantially limited, she probably wouldn’t be able to perform the essential functions of the job anyway. Then the protections wouldn’t apply.
Source: Sacramento Bee, 2/21/03. Finding Job Assistance for People with Disabilities By John M. Williams In January 2002, when 22-year-old Jamie Kassay decided to look for a job, he sat down and with a pencil and tablet in front of him and began listing the people and agencies he could approach for help. A graduate from a well-known university in upper New York State, Kassay says, “I had over 30 interviews as a senior and no one even came close to hiring me.” An information technology major with a minor in computer networking, Kassay admits his 2.4 grade point average will not set the world on fire and he could have definitely earned higher grades if he had studied harder. Still, he says with strong conviction, “I know the reason I am not employed is because I have cerebral palsy.” Kassay also admits that “I never wanted help from any of the disability organizations because I wanted to be hired on my merits.” During his four years at the university, he never joined the Disabled Students’ Union and never became involved in any of the activities the union sponsored. Today Kassay’s attitude has changed, and he is willing to take any help he can. And so, as he pores over his list of organizations working with people with disabilities, he discovers affiliations for people with cerebral palsy or people with one or more hearing, vision, speech, mobility, or cognitive disabilities. Because he knew he needed guidance for interviewing and career counseling, he visited over two days the office of Vocational Rehabilitation, an Endependence Living Center, and a UCP affiliate. He was pleased with the input he received. “I learned about the Ticket to Work Program, and how to present myself in a business manner during an interview,” Kassay says. It took six months of working with various organizations who partner with employers in the public and private sector, but in July 2002, a 23-year-old Kassay was offered a full time job as a computer network engineer for $33,000 a year near Syracuse, New York. “I prayed for assistance and got it. I know without the help of all the agencies and companies working with them, I would still be unemployed,” says Kassay. The agencies working with Kassay are proud of what they did to assist him. … Nationwide there are stories similar to Kassay’s. In Miami, Florida, Tim O’Connell, who is blind, worked for a year with agencies and organizations assisting blind people, and is currently a researcher for a book publisher. In Houston, Texas, 19-year-old Manuel Castille, who is deaf, is an orderly at a rehabilitation hospital and a college freshman. He says, “I got help from an organization working with deaf people on job issues.” In Los Angeles, California, Billy Hue, 25, works as a ticket seller at a Regal Cinemas movie theater.Hue stutters and has a cognitive disability. He was unemployed for four years. However, after working for 15 months with a state agency dealing with cognitive disabilities and getting state funding for speech therapy lessons, he was offered a job with benefits. In Boston, MA, double-hand amputee Lilly Carmichael works as a legal assistant through a public/private jobs program. She types and answers the telephone and searches the Internet for legal briefs. Carmichael says, “I am employed because I received the assistance available for people with disabilities. I think more people with disabilities should take advantage of government and private services for people with disabilities.” Of course, not every person assisted by disability agencies and organizations finds a job. Michael Morris in Alexandria, Virginia, who is partially deaf and has a speech disability, has been job hunting for two years. He says he has been working with the Vocational Rehabilitation Office and an organization for the deaf, but has not had success. Still, he credits them for their efforts and for giving him hope. … To increase hope and real work opportunities, there should be a massive communications effort informing the nation of the plight of millions of unemployed working-age people with disabilities. The new Congress should make employment of people with disabilities a priority by funding more government personnel to assist unemployed people with disabilities in finding jobs. A national affirmative action program to increase employment of people with disabilities is needed now. Source: The Union-Tribune, 12/22/02. Psychiatric Disability on the Rise By Elizabeth Fried Ellen, LSW If you have noticed a rise in the number of patients seeking mental health disability benefits, it is not your imagination. Mental health is the fastest growing sector of the federal disability recipient pool and continues to grow steadily. Mental impairment accounted for 22% of state agency disability awards in 1999, double the percentage it was in 1980. Unemployment, other financial stressors and the success of public outreach efforts by the Social Security Administration (SSA) are all possible reasons for this increase. “My impression is that over the last five years, there has been a rise of about 30%” in the number of patients seeking federal and/or employer-sponsored disability, said Marc Graff, MD, a psychiatrist with Kaiser Permanente in Reseda, CA. He told Psychiatric Times, “A greater percentage of my time and effort has been spent on that, more than before.” Graff believes the increase may be due to several factors: the de-stigmatization of mental illness and a societal trend toward bureaucratization; patients less intimidated by paperwork than in the past and [more] willing to aggressively advocate for themselves; and a shift among Americans toward greater emotional investment in their jobs and careers. With this investment in career as a defining emotional focus, disruptions and conflicts in the workplace are more commonly experienced as consuming and even disabling. “Work is the major issue in people's lives,” said Graff. … While the number of patients seeking psychiatric disability has risen, Graff said patients seeking disability present with the same disorders as always --major depression and bipolar disorder. Despite the growing prevalence of disability petitions, many doctors are ill- equipped to properly fill out disability forms, much less to deal with the dynamic issues that can arise. The need for expertise is especially keen in university hospital clinics and community mental health centers. The low socio-economic status of patients in these settings, coupled with the severity of their illness, substantially boosts the likelihood that they will be applying for disability benefits. “We don't like conflicts with our patients, and we want to be helpful,” said Kelly Clark, M.D., a psychiatrist with the University of Massachusetts Medical School. … Understanding the Process According to Clark, one of the most common and problematic mistakes her colleagues make is failing to understand the limits of their influence. … “It's a legal definition, not a clinical one.” Unfortunately, some clinicians mistakenly believe that a note from them virtually guarantees approval of a disability application — a belief that is often transmitted to patients. Similarly, Clark has seen her share of patients who show up armed with disability forms and the expectation that she will support their application. … Disability payments may be significantly delayed or even denied if a physician does not understand the idiosyncratic and often labyrinthine criteria of public and private disability plans. Problems also can arise if the physician, deliberately or inadvertently, does not provide enough relevant information to give a full understanding of the patient's clinical status. … Unless the treating psychiatrist also provides the patient's level of functioning during a depressive episode, reviewers will not gain a full understanding of the patient's average level of functioning, which may be quite poor. Clinical data about the side effects of a given medication are also important, particularly if the patient is employed in an occupation that puts them or others at risk of physical injury. Therapeutic Alliance … Treating clinicians may be legitimately concerned that receipt of disability benefits might encourage and/or reinforce dependency and interfere with a patient's incentive to make and retain therapeutic gains. Working with disability benefit recipients has “helped me to appreciate the adverse effect that idleness has on people,” David Mischoulon, M.D., Ph.D., a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. … The needs of employers also play a major role when it comes to determining if a patient is ready to go back to work. Employers “want to have their people return to work promptly, but they don't want people to come back who are unable to handle the work,” Graff explained. He recalled the case of an employee on psychiatric disability for recurrent major depression with psychotic features. … Ironically, the issue that most concerned the patient's employers was the fact that his medication was somewhat sedating. … Clark believes many problems in the therapeutic relationship can be avoided, or at least minimized, if doctor and patient openly discuss their views of the patient's perceived disability. Clark always fills out disability forms with the patient during the regular office visit. … In addition, filling out the form together discourages patient passivity and removes the appearance of secrecy. Graff thinks there is a dynamic tension between patients’ expectations and the privileges doctors actually have. … Graff said several patients each day ask him to fill out disability forms. … Graff does not think patients seeking disability benefits are more entitled than other patients, but believes patients in general feel increasingly entitled and have greater expectations of treaters. In the case of those seeking disability, an attitude of entitlement can strain the therapeutic relationship, particularly if the clinician does not believe the patient is disabled but is “playing the system” for the sake of financial gain. … Talking to Patients The task of talking to patients applying for disability can be a delicate one. Unwanted changes in job responsibilities or conflicts with supervisors or co-workers frequently are cited by these patients, who often are surprised to learn the actual degree of disability required to meet the eligibility criteria of federal agencies and/or private employers. For example, patients may mistakenly believe they are entitled to disability benefits if they are unable to perform job responsibilities in their given field. In fact, SSA regulations (2002) define disability as “the inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment(s) which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” … Consequently, familiarity with disability guidelines can serve to give these patients a realistic sense of the chances that their application will be approved and can create an opportunity to generate alternative, empowering solutions. Similarly, questions about specific job responsibilities can pinpoint areas of strength, as well as difficulty. Mischoulon suggests that clinicians adopt a stance of cautious pessimism when talking with patients about the probability of receiving benefits. If a psychiatrist does not believe their patient is disabled, Mischoulon suggests that the clinician share this impression with the patient. Specifically, Mischoulon recommends that the psychiatrist tell the patient that they believe the petition for disability to be an indirect way of getting personal needs met. Remaining empathic with the patient's wish to be taken care of while inviting them to actively participate in generating alternative ways to get needs met can go a long way toward preserving the therapeutic alliance while maintaining focus on negotiated treatment goals. If a patient is deemed eligible for benefits, work should continue to maintain clinical momentum, which, for seriously and chronically ill patients, may mean working toward a return to baseline functioning. Clark does not discuss disability as a permanent situation with patients, even if their prognosis is poor. “My goal is to get them to the highest level of functioning,” she explained. Additional reading:
Source: Psychiatric Times, 12/02, Vol. XIX, Issue 12. AAPD Announces Internship in DC The American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD), a national membership organization, is pleased to announce a summer congressional internship program for college students with disabilities that grants from 2002 founding sponsor Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation (MEAF) and Independence Technology, a Johnson & Johnson company, have funded. The Internship Program will provide an opportunity for students with disabilities to work on Capitol Hill and acquire valuable work experience that will enrich their academic studies.Interns will gain insight into Congressional office operations, how public policy is developed, and the roles of the various constituencies in the legislative/political process. AAPD invites under-graduate students with disabilities to apply for this program.
Source: AAPD Disability Vote Project, 1629 K St, NW, #802, Washington, DC 20006; (202) 955-6114 Annual Training Offered To Settle ADA Claim Employees at a Denver-area Holiday Inn will be taught that there is no corporate policy against hiring disabled workers as part of a settlement agreement to resolve an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claim, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Feb. 19th. The hotel manager told Katrina Cue, a hearing-impaired applicant for a room service job, that she was not qualified because of her disability, but offered her a job bussing tables, according to the commission. When Cue tried to arrange a time for orientation, an HR manager allegedly told her there might be a corporate policy against hiring deaf people and promised to contact her after checking with headquarters, but never did. Holiday Inn later said Cue was too young to work. The commission sued John Q. Hammons Hotels, which operates the Holiday Inn- Northglenn, CO, on Cue's behalf. In addition to annual employee training, the hotel will pay Cue $75,000 to settle the case (EEOC v. John Q. Hammons Hotels). Source: Thompson Publishing, Inc. Monthly Bulletin Supreme Court to Review Two More Disability Cases By Linda Greenhouse WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 — The Supreme Court, accepting a new case today on the legal obligations of employers toward people with disabilities, agreed to decide whether companies can refuse to rehire rehabilitated drug users whose substance abuse had brought about their dismissals. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, current addiction is excluded from the definition of disability, leaving employers free to fire those who violate workplace rules against using illegal drugs. The question in the case today, an appeal by Raytheon, is how the 1990 disabilities law applies to the common employers’ policy of refusing to rehire anyone dismissed for workplace misconduct. The federal appeals court in San Francisco reinstated a disability discrimination suit brought against Raytheon by a former service technician who maintained that he had conquered the alcoholism and drug problems that had led to his forced resignation after 25 years at the Hughes Missile Systems Company, which Raytheon later acquired. The company, invoking its policy against rehiring, had deemed him ineligible to return. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in ruling in June that the worker, Joel Hernandez, was entitled to take his case to trial. The Federal District Court in Tucson had earlier dismissed his suit. In its Supreme Court appeal, Raytheon Company v. Hernandez, No. 02-749, the company is arguing that although the disability law “took pains not to give special rights to drug users,” the appeals court did just that by finding one-time drug abusers entitled to a second chance at employment. … The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission supported Mr. Hernandez when he took his complaint to the commission in 1997. The Bush administration has not taken a position on the issue before the Supreme Court, but will presumably make its views known before the case is argued in October. Returning from a midwinter recess, the court also granted review in another disability-related case, an appeal by the Social Security Administration on the definition of disability that determines eligibility for Supplemental Security Income benefits. The Social Security Act limits eligibility to people whose impairments are so severe that not only are they unable to engage in their “previous work,” but are also unable to perform” any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy.” The statute defines the last phrase as “work which exists in significant numbers” in the local region or elsewhere in the country. Invoking the statute, the agency denied benefits to a woman who said cardiac and back problems prevented her from continuing to work as a housekeeper. An administrative judge at the agency found that the woman, Pauline Thomas, could work at “a light level of exertion” and retained “the functional capacity to return to past work as an elevator operator.” But Ms. Thomas argued, and the federal appeals court in Philadelphia agreed, that the job of elevator operator no longer existed in sufficient numbers to qualify as available work under the statute. There was “no plausible reason” why Congress would have wanted to deny benefits to a person who “could perform a previous job that no longer exists,” the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit said in its opinion in June. The government's Supreme Court appeal, Barhnart v. Thomas, No. 02-763, asserts that the decision “will impose additional administrative burdens and costs” on the Social Security disability program. “Given today’s dynamic and technological economy,” the appeal said, “job types are becoming obsolete with increasing frequency.” The government said that in creating the disability program, Congress had never assumed that people were suited for just one narrow type of employment. Source: The New York Times, 2/25/03. National Council on Disability Examines ADA Decisions by Supreme Court WASHINGTON-The National Council on Disability (NCD) today released two policy briefs analyzing and responding to certain untenable aspects of US Supreme Court decisions on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Impact of the Supreme Court’s ADA Decisions on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities explores the impact the Supreme Court’s decisions have had on people with disabilities. It reviews court decisions, as well as anecdotal evidence, and demonstrates that the Court's restrictive reading of the ADA has undermined Congress’ goal of eradicating discrimination on the basis of disability. The Americans with Disabilities Act: The Implications of the Supreme Court's ADA Decision in Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett looks specifically at the Garrett decision and how it continued the Court’s agenda for curtailing Congressional power to enact civil rights legislation. It also looks at how the Court’s reasoning called into question the factual underpinnings of the ADA and the history of discrimination against people with disabilities. In future papers in this series, NCD will examine various specific substantive aspects of the Court’s rulings that have weakened or restricted the impact of the ADA. … NCD will then develop legislative proposals for addressing those issues that appear appropriate for legislative correction, and present those proposals, along with pertinent supportive material from the previous papers in a final, comprehensive report, Righting the ADA. For more information, contact Mark Quigley at 202-272-2004. Where Does the Sidewalk End and the ADA Begin? By Tony Mauro The next major battleground over the scope and meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) may be the public sidewalk.In City of Sacramento v. Barden, No. 02-815, which goes before the U.S. Supreme Court at its private conference this Friday, the issue is whether the 1990 federal disabilities law requires local governments to overhaul existing sidewalks to make them more accessible to the disabled.In an amicus curiae brief filed in the case, the National League of Cities warns of “dire fiscal consequences” if the high court answers yes. Justices will decide at the conference whether or not to grant review in the case, along with dozens of others. The Court will also meet in conference on March 7. Ever since the ADA was passed, the high court has had a steady diet of cases interpreting its provisions. The Sacramento CA case asks whether municipal sidewalks are the type of government “program, service or activity” the law says must be made accessible to those with disabilities. Aided by the Oakland, CA-based organization Disability Rights Advocates, Sacramento resident Joan Barden, along with others with mobility and vision disabilities, filed a class action against the city under ADA in 1999. Their aim was to force the city to remove obstacles from existing Sacramento sidewalks — such as poles, benches and broken concrete — as well as to install curb ramps in new sidewalks. The city agreed to the demands for curb cuts when it builds new sidewalks, but balked at the costly renovation of existing walkways, asserting such changes were not covered by the ADA. After a district judge ruled for the city, a unanimous panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and ruled against Sacramento, finding that public sidewalks are subject to the accessibility requirements of the ADA. …9th Circuit Judge A. Wallace Tashima wrote for the panel, “The focus of the inquiry, therefore, is not so much on whether a particular public function can technically be characterized as a service, program, or activity, but whether it is a normal function of a governmental entity.” By that standard, Tashima held sidewalks are clearly covered. Tashima also said ADA regulations requiring curb ramps “would be meaningless if the sidewalks between the curb ramps were inaccessible.” But Sacramento, in its appeal to the Supreme Court, argues strenuously that the law does not cover sidewalks. “Services are something that can be received by the public, and programs or activities are things that citizens participate in,” asserts Roy Englert Jr., a partner at Washington DC’s Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck & Untereiner, on behalf of Sacramento. “No one receives or participates in a sidewalk.” … Englert also notes that the Justice Department, the lead agency in interpreting the ADA, only recently came to the view that the ADA covers sidewalks, when it intervened in the Sacramento case. Congress, according to Englert, distinguished between existing and new facilities in enacting the ADA, mindful of the cost of requiring cities to demolish and rebuild their entire infrastructure. He cited numerous lower court rulings that found other analogous entities not to be covered by the law. … Laurence Paradis, executive director of the Oakland-based disability rights group, argues in a brief to the high court that the 9th Circuit ruling was clearly correct. … Paradis also asserts that broken concrete and blocked paths often make sidewalks impassable or dangerous for those with disabilities. … Source: American Lawyer Media, 2/24/03 By David Shepardson VAN BUREN TOWNSHIP — A federal judge's halt of construction at two apartment complexes may force builders across the country to spend millions to ensure that disabled people have equal access. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Victoria A. Roberts issued a preliminary injunction barring Farmington Hills-based Edward Rose and Sons from further construction or occupancy of 15 apartment buildings, including six at Westlake Apartments in Van Buren Township. “Defendants alleged actions effectively deprive disabled individuals of accessible housing. This conduct is quite egregious,” she wrote in her 23-page opinion. “They appear to be comfortable in providing only back door access to people with disabilities; …. It is very likely that they will have other opportunities to commit future violations.” The ruling came in response to a civil rights lawsuit filed by the US Dept. of Justice against the privately held company that has constructed or manages hundreds of apartment complexes in nine states. “People with disabilities are the only protected class of people who can be denied access to housing solely because of the building's design,” US Attorney Jeffrey G. Collins said Friday. “(Roberts’) decision that the FairHousing Act requires ground-floor apartments to have a primary entrance which is accessible to the disabled sends an important message to the construction industry.” Attorneys for Edward Rose argued the decision would force layoffs and cost the company millions. The government says the same design that forces disabled people to use patio door entrances far from parking lots is in use in at least 20 additional complexes in Michigan and other states. One issue in the dispute is that building codes in Michigan and most other states require apartment buildings to have fire suppression systems and elevators, generally if they are above three stories, the Justice Department said in court papers. Redesigning the apartment buildings to place the front door at street level might require the company to make the buildings shorter or require them to add safety features. James Harris, vice president for the National Multi Housing Council/ National Apartment Association, said in an affidavit that the court's ruling could cost the industry at least $103 million. He called the cost “a substantial burden.” Richard Bernstein, a Farmington Hills lawyer who regularly handles disabled rights cases, praised the decision. “What is the benefit of them building apartments that aren't accessible?” hesaid. “It’s bad business to exclude the disabled.”
Source: The Detroit News, 3/2/03. HUD Program to Create More Barrier-Free Housing WASHINGTON — A recently announced initiative from Dept. of Housing and Urban Development will allow homebuilders, developers, architects and designers to have access to the latest training and technical guidance on how to comply with accessible design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act. HUD has dubbed its comprehensive campaign, which includes formal training, a website and a technical guidance resource center, Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST. “The education and outreach activities of this project will help to make those in the housing industry more aware of their responsibilities under the Fair Housing Act,” said Carolyn Y. Peoples, HUD assistant secretary for fair housing and equal opportunity. … According to Peoples, the Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST program is intended to educate and inform people about the Act’s requirements before design and construction begins, thus avoiding costly retrofitting by builders and increasing housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. Training is a major component of HUD’s efforts. The training curriculum consists of nine modules that can be presented individually or in any combination. The modules include: an overview of the fair housing act accessibility requirements; disability rights laws; enforcement of the act; strategies for compliant kitchens; strategies for compliant bathrooms; common design and construction violations and solutions; accessible routes; and accessible public and common-use areas. The newly developed web site contains information about educational and legal materials, best practices, a training and conference calendar, frequently asked questions, and links to related sites. The Design and Construction Resource Center has experts who can answer questions about legal and technical requirements of Act. The program is being implemented by BearingPoint, Inc. The Center's toll-free number is (888) 341-7781, and is staffed Monday through Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM (ET). In addition to the FIRST program, HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is partnering with the International Code Council to provide training and technical assistance to states and other jurisdictions on the benefits of adopting building codes or laws that incorporate standards in compliance with the Act. HUD is the nation's housing agency committed to increasing home-ownership, particularly among minorities, creating affordable housing opportunities for low-income Americans, supporting the homeless, elderly, people with disabilities and people living with AIDS. The Department also promotes economic and community development as well as enforces the nation's fair housing laws.
Newsletter Launched to Publicize Help America Vote Act The Help America Vote Act is landmark legislation that has the power to dramatically improve our electoral process for citizens with disabilities. In order to raise further awareness of the law's accessibility provisions, Inclusion Solutions is proud to announce the launch of a new resource, HAVAccess, a monthly electronic newsletter designed to further educate election officials on the issue of accessibility. The newsletter will provide analysis of the accessibility issue, information on federal funds for improving access, case studies and direct perspectives from voters with disabilities. While we understand that there are many necessary factors to improve the electoral process for voters with disabilities, HAVAccess will focus specifically on the issue of physical access to polling places. Travelers with Disabilities Spend $27 Billion/Year The Open Doors Organization in cooperation with the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA) and the Society for Accessible Travel and Hospitality (SATH) released a landmark study on the spending trends and market scope of US resident travelers with disabilities.The study, conducted by Harris Interactive, polled 1,037 people with disabilities. The major findings of this ground breaking study were released January 16th at the Annual SATH World Congress in Miami. The study suggested that people with disabilities could spend at least $27 billion a year, if certain needs were met. These include a “meet and greet” at airports and preferred seating — as top issues for the airlines while lodging issues included the need for rooms close to amenities and staff members that go out of their way to accommodate guests with disabilities. People with disabilities spent $13.6 billion on 31.7 million trips in the past year. The modifications suggested by the survey could increase expenditures by 100% per year. In 2001 the airline industry saw $3.3 billion in spending by travelers with disabilities, resulting in 52,800 jobs created to provide services for people with disabilities. The lodging industry saw $4.2 billion in spending and 60,000 jobs.The study also suggested that people with disabilities could at least double their spending, generating $6.4 billion for airlines and $8.4 billion for lodging, if the needs of travelers with disabilities were addressed. Currently travelers with disabilities generate a total of 194,000 travel-related jobs, $4.22 billion in payroll and $2.52 billion in tax revenues in the US. The study was conducted to measure general travel behaviors, including how often people with disabilities travel, with whom they travel, how much they spend while on the road, the mode of transportation and accommodations used, and on which sources of information they rely to make decisions. The study provides information that travel industry and related businesses will find invaluable as they seek to stem large losses following the terrorist acts of 9/11/01.The upside potential for both the economy and the travel industry is highly significant.TIA participated in the study in a consulting capacity, advising in the questionnaire design and validating the study and its findings against TIA’s substantial market and economic research resources for the US travel industry. Source: Press Release, Open Doors. WASHINGTON, D.C. February, 26, 2003 — Rev. Harold H. Wilke, a pioneering religious leader, disability advocate and founding Board Member of the National Organization on Disability (NOD), died yesterday in Claremont, CA. He was 88 years old. A member of the U.S. Council for the Year of Disabled Persons and a Board Member of both NOD and its international arm, the World Committee on Disability, Dr. Wilke delivered the blessing at the White House signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act on July 26, 1990. Following the signing, Pres. George H.W. Bush passed the signing pen to Rev. Wilke, who accepted it with his foot — because he was born without arms. Dr. Wilke served on the faculty at Union Theological Seminary in New York. Source: Press Release, National Organization on Disability | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
