Karlen Communications

Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Solutions

Karlen Communications and Karen McCall are involved in the advocacy for the rights of people with disabilities and basic human rights. It was hoped that the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the subsequent Customer Service Standards, Integrated Accessibility Standards and the Built Environment Standards would make our province a leader in inclusive communities. However, it is clear from the case study of the County of Brant Ontario in 2012 that there is no compliance or enforcement mechanism and our basic human rights are being eroded rather than reinforced and strengthened.

Dean Mayo Moran Independent Review of AODA 2014

Mayo Moran Independent Review of AODA Final Report 2015 (tagged PDF, 2MB).

Written submission to Dean Mayo Moran AODA Review.

Presentation to the Dean Mayo Moran Independent Review of the AODA (London Ontario, April 9, 2014).

Discussion Paper on Inclusive Education

Although this paper was written a couple of years ago, it is still relevant as we move toward the rights of people with disabilities and inclusion in our communities.

AODA and Education in Ontario: A Discussion Paper

Customer Service Standards (AODA)

The following resources are written by Karen McCall for use in customer service training or training on disability awareness. The documents may contain anecdotal examples of barriers to goods and services.

Disability Awareness Training Scenarios

Specialized Transportation Service

The move to eliminate specialized transportation service or Para transit in the County of Brant Ontario Canada is one of the first "open and deliberate challenges" to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) and the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulations, Part IV Transportation (IASR). Unfortunately it will not be the last.

What can be learned from the experience of people with disabilities in the County of Brant is that there is no oversight or review of the provincial legislation or AODA. Ironically, it was lack of oversight of the contract for specialized transportation service in the County that led to the events currently in process in the County.

Since writing newsletter and blog articles on this subject over a one year period we found the County of Brant is not the only municipality to attempt to decrease service for people with disabilities which is contrary to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, Integrated Accessibility Standards, part IV - Transportation. Few smaller municipalities know what their obligations are under the AODA, IAS part IV Transportation or any other part of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. We need education and enforcement for municipalities as we move forward with deadlines for achieving an inclusive Ontario.

We also need specialized transportation services/Para transit to be included in the Government of Ontario Aging at Home Strategy along with health care. Without the ability to access specialized transportation/Para transit in their community, people with disabilities and seniors will be confined to their homes.

Emerging Trends in Specialized Transport in Rural Communities: Exposing the Myths (2014)

Specialized Transportation Service Report, County of Brant Ontario.

Accessibility Advisory Committee Report to Council, December 2012 (diverted to Community Services Committee for information only).

The following blog articles were written in an attempt to identify the violation of the basic and protected human rights of people with disabilities in the County of Brant. The County of Brant is a case study in how municipalities can avoid implementing the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and its standards with no repercussion related to compliance or enforcement of the provincial law.

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act is promoted provincially, nationally and internationally as a step forward for those of us with disabilities and a commitment toward an inclusive society. However, it is clear from the case study of the County of Brant Ontario that there are serious flaws in the compliance and enforcement of the provincial laws.

Enforcing AODA: The Big Purple Elephant in the Room

Accessibility Directorate of Ontario Abandons People with Disabilities in the County of Brant

County of Brant Reverses its Decision to Discriminate Against People with Disabilities

County of Brant Setting Legal Precedence by Continuing to Defy Integrated Accessibility Standards

“If an Ontario Human Rights Complaint is Files, We will Stop Providing Para Transit” County of Brant

County of Brant Integrated Accessibility Standards for Transportation or “Who’s on First”

County of Brant Fails Budget 101: Accessible Non-Affordable Transportation for People with Disabilities

How Effective is the Integrated Accessibility Standard, Part IV – Transportation? Not so Much!

Specialized Transportation Service and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act

County of Brant Discriminates Against People with Disabilities

County of Brant “Celebrates” International Human Rights Day with Resignation of Two More Members of the Accessibility Advisory Committee

County of Brant “Inaccessibility in Motion” Scheme: Everything old is new again!

County of Brant: We Have Support from the Accessibility Directorate of Ontario to Eliminate Para transit

Does the New Accessibility Coordinator for the County of Brant have a Conflict of Interest?

People with Disabilities get Support from Former County of Brant Councilor in Specialized Transportation Service Struggle

Resignation from County of Brant AAC Over Systemic Discrimination/Para Transit Scheme

Why are People with Disabilities Treated with dignity and Respect in Brantford but not the County of Brant?

Hamilton Council Decision Highlights the Need for Clearer Standards Language

Hamilton Turns an “Oops” into a HUGE Mess!

County of Brant Seeks Comments on “Subsidized Transportation Program!” April Fool’s Day in May

County of Brant Closer to Eliminating Para Transit with RFP

Is it Time for a UN Investigation into AODA Compliance and Enforcement?

In May 2013 the County, which had not been overseeing an expired contract for Para transit, accused those of us with disabilities of "abusing" Para transit by going shopping, to the casino, to restaurants and basically being independent and participating in our community. Para transit in the County is taxi-based. There is no conventional or fixed route transit.

The County wanted to violate the AODA and basic human rights by restricting where those of us with disabilities could travel. The first transportation scheme limited travel to staff identified "medical or work" trips with staff deciding who has a disability and who doesn't. There are eligibility criteria in the Integrated Accessibility Standards.

After objections from community members of an ad hoc specialized transportation service/Para transit committee, the ad hoc committee was dissolved in August 2012. The Mayor stated that the "wrong community members were chosen for the ad hoc committee"and cited "infighting" as the reason for dissolution. The Community Services committee agreed and directed staff to report to Community Services. Staff were busy behind the scenes creating a new transportation scheme and reporting directly to the Community Services Committee.

In November 2012 the new scheme was unveiled: of the $100,000 2012 budget for Para transit, $25,000 would be spent on actually providing the service while the remaining $75,000 would be spent on an administrative position to manage the $25,000. Trips would be restricted to staff identified "medical" trips only and staff would once again determine who has a disability and who doesn't based on staff criteria.

At the November 19, 2012 meeting of the now resurrected ad hoc specialized transportation service/Para transit committee, we were told that if we didn't approve the violation of AODA, the Integrated Accessibility Standards and our basic and protected human rights, Para transit would "stop immediately."

Throughout this process budget has been an issue. Those of us with disabilities recognize that budget is an issue that needed to be addressed during the past six years of the contract. However the County has not managed the budget over the past six years of contracted service and is not looking at expanding the "current budget" for the foreseeable future. The County has not explored other models of program delivery but has spent the last six months moving toward the elimination of Para transit in the County. So budget issues would appear to be a diversion while our basic and protected human rights are being denied.

The County is consulting the County Solicitor to obtain information on human rights and the obligations under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (November 2012).

December 3, 2012, the United Nations International Day for People with Disabilities, the County Community Services Committee approved yet another variant of the staff transportation scheme.

Perhaps the most disturbing element of this approved scheme is not directly related to it. The Community Services Committee, backed by staff have said that "if a human rights complaint is filed, the service will stop. This is an option we have."

Two more members of the Accessibility Advisory Committee resigned December 10, 2012 because of the systemic discrimination against people wit disabilities.

Resignation from the County of Brant AAC Over Systemic Discrimination.

Additionally, Karen has sent letters to the editor of the Paris Star that have been printed in the weekly newspaper. They are included here in accessible digital format.

August 2012 County of Brant Poised to Eliminate Para Transit.

September 2012 County of Brant Determined to Eliminate Para Transit.

November 2012 Christmas Gift for People with Disabilities: No Para Transit as of January 2013.

November 2012 On International Day of Disability, County will Eliminate Para Transit.

December 6, 2012 People with Disabilities told: "File a Human Rights Complaint and Lose Para Transit".

January 2013 County of Brant “Finds” Additional $100,000 for Para Transit! Now What?

March 2013 Para Transit Catastrophe in the County: The Tsunami Continues.

March 2013 "Circle in a Spiral, Wheel within a Wheel" Para Transit Saga Continues.

April 2013 Specialized Transportation Service: Have we made Progress?.

April 2013 Progress has been made but Attitudes and Language are still Issues with Specialized Transportation Service.

May 2013 Here we go Again!

May 2013 Magical Misdirection of Para Transit Issues.

May 2013 The Legacy of County Council and People with Disabilities.

June 2013 County of Brant Closer to Eliminating Para Transit.

August 2013 Concerns and Confusion around Approved Transportation Scheme for People with Disabilities

September 2013 New Strategy to Eliminate Para Transit in the county?

December 2013 People with Disabilities get "Scrooged" by County.

January 2014 Para Transit still under Siege.

February 2014 Accessibility Advisory Committee Eliminates Para Transit on Holidays.

March 2014 County AAC Eliminates Para Transit on Holidays (confirmed).

April 2014 Service Provider asks to "Pillage" Funding for Para Transit

April 2014 Letter to Council

On April 19,2013 the County put forward a "draft" proposal for guidelines for an RFP or Request for Proposals. The document stated that comments were welcome and there was no deadline for submitting comments.

Apparently there was a deadline. The document was discussed and approved by the Accessibility Advisory Committee on April 23, 2013. The "deadline" for submitting comments would have been April 18...yes, the day before the "draft" was sent out as part of the agenda for the April 23 AAC meting.

Comments on the Draft RFP Guidelines submitted by Karen McCall, May 8, 2013.

It was discovered on May 8 that the deadline for submitting comments was the day before the draft document was actually released for comments.

On June 6, 2013 the RFP was made public. The first paragraph of the document lays the "blame" and responsibility for the RFP and the attached guidelines squarely at the feet of the Accessibility Advisory Committee.

Within the RFP document are two clauses that also clearly state that the contract is only for four months, September 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013, that any continuing of the "subsidized transportation program" is dependent on Council providing funding and that if funding is not approved, the program will stop December 31, 2013.

All of the violations of the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulations are still contained within the structure of the program and its guidelines. As stated in one of the June letters to the Editor of the Paris Star, the only silver lining, if there is one, is that now human rights complaints can be filed. The statement by the County that "if a human rights complaint is filed, the service will stop" is now moot. The County will be successful in reaching its goal of the past year of eliminating Para transit on December 31, 2013.

There are no plans, strategic meetings, budget meetings - nothing currently being done in the County to ensure that those of us with disabilities have affordable and sustainable Para transit.

The events of the County of Brant and Para transit were presented at an international conference at the University of Guelph in May 2013 as a case study in the failure of the AODA (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities act) and its subsequent standards.

AODA: Blueprint for Exclusion - A Case Study conference presentation in tagged PDF.

AODA: Blueprint for Exclusion, Update 2014 conference presentation in tagged PDF.

What is the real difference in Ontario now that we have the AODA and its standards? With no enforcement and non-compliance running wild, how has this legislation improved the lives of those of us with disabilities in any measurable or meaningful way? We still have nowhere to bring discriminatory actions to and now we have violations of the law with nowhere to report them to.

It appears that the County of Brant isn't the only municipality struggling with the Integrated Accessibility Standards. The City Of Hamilton has its own problems.

A key principle to remember when looking at the Integrated Accessibility standards is that they are "minimum" standards and there is nothing stopping anyone from exceeding them. It should also be remembered that the goal is an "inclusive" society so removing systems in place that facilitate independence of people with disabilities shouldn't be eliminated. This comes up with section 66 of the Integrated Accessibility Standards around fare parity. The standard says you can't charge people with disabilities more for the same service but it also says you can charge them less...that part is just hidden in the text which makes the language of the Integrated Accessibility Standards confusing.

Hamilton Council Decision Highlights Need for Clearer Standards Language.

Hamilton Turns an "Oops" into a Huge Mess.

As of May 2012, Hamilton to temporarily leave things as they are while they plan and strategist for the future..

In April of 2014 the lack of dignity and respect toward those of us with disabilities at Toronto Pearson Airport made the national news. As soon as an apology was issued, this systemic problem was not mentioned again in the media.

Will We Finally get Reform of Disability Services at Toronto Pearson Airport?

Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the future of Education in Ontario

A key component to the successful implementation of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act is the revision of curriculum in Ontario to be inclusive.

This means that in primary, secondary and tertiary education any content or software used in the education process will be accessible. It also means that students will be taught how to create universally designed content as a core part of the assignments, projects and collaborative tasks.

Karen McCall has written a discussion paper to being the task of ensuring that graduates in Ontario are employable. Without the integration of universal design in all components of the Ontario educational system the burden to retrain graduates will fall to the businesses requiring AODA compliance.

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act includes categories such as customer service, employment, transportation, information communication and the built environment. Elements of all of these categories are taught throughout the educational process therefore inclusive curriculum should be implemented.

Ontario can be a global leader in inclusive education and an inclusive culture by revising curriculum to meet or exceed the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act standards.

AODA inclusive curriculum discussion paper.

The Background of Accessible Content Design

The goal of accessibility is to allow the end-user to choose how they view and interact with content. Accessibility is equal access rather than alternative access and direct access rather than comparable access [IMS Guidelines for Developing Learning Applications]. This is also the philosophy behind the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines.

"Accessibility and usability" are not static elements but evolve and emerge with our ability to implement new techniques and technologies.

Karlen Communications is dedicated to complete and current technology toward accessible and usable digital environments and content. We advocate for the creation of accessible content and the right of the individual to create a differently accessible version of the content. Providing several formats is simply impractical from a budgeting perspective and does not allow the person accessing the content true choice in how they view and interact with the content. Someone might prefer one format for a mobile device and another for a non-mobile device. Creating content that is accessible puts the choice in the hands of those accessing it.

Direct AODA Links

AODA Alliance

AODA by the Government of Ontario

Accessibility News - Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (this is not a government site)

Ontario Regulation 429/09 (Customer Service Standards)

Ontario Regulation 191/11 (Integrated Accessibility Standards – Information Communication, Employment and Transportation)

Built Environment Standards are still being developed.

Human rights Law in Canada

The following resources identify the human rights those of us in Canada should have at the provincial and federal level.

Canadian Human Rights Act.

Ontario Human Rights Code.

OHRC Duty to Accommodate including the identification of undue hardship criteria.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities which Canada ratified in 2010.