mark handler
SAWHORSE
Businesses must comply with disabilities act, not ignore it
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jun/25/businesses-must-comply-with-ada-not-ignore-it/
By Amy B. Vandeveld
midnight, June 25, 2011
Twenty years after passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act, many businesses still have made no effort to remove access barriers. Businessman George Coles and Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, want to provide protection for these scofflaw businesses – big and small – by imposing a nonsensical, burdensome notice requirement on people with disabilities. To garner support, the business community once again rolls out its talking points that paint business owners as “victims,” disabled plaintiffs as “opportunists,” and access design standards as “confusing” and “ever-changing.” The confused, hapless business owner hasn’t removed access barriers because he simply can’t understand what is expected of him, they tell us.
In reality, the ADA standards have only been changed once since 1990, in 2010. For two decades, free information about the ADA has been available to business owners, including the easy-to-read “ADA Guide for Small Businesses.” Everyone has heard about the ADA. So why is it that barriers still exist? Studies show that the real reason that most offending businesses still are not in compliance with the ADA is that they don’t want to spend any money removing access barriers – even when offered assistance to do so – until they’re forced to do so by litigation. To put it simply, they hedge their bets.
Rep. Hunter wants to provide cover for those scofflaw businesses who “roll the dice.” He wants people with disabilities to send “notice” letters to the “confused” business owners before a lawsuit can be filed. We’re assured that, once the notice is received, “most businesses would promptly fix the problem.”
So let’s analyze this. A person with a disability can be expected to know access design standards well enough to send notice, but a person savvy enough to run a business, understand labor laws, negotiate commercial lease agreements and file articles of incorporation is somehow intellectually inferior?
The real tragedy is that, under Hunter’s bill, scofflaw businesses get to sit back and make absolutely no effort to remove access barriers until a person with a disability gives “notice,” which could be never. That is exactly the point of the bill. We don’t need to guess how many businesses will take advantage of that free pass. More businesses will be inaccessible for longer periods of time, perhaps forever. All to the detriment of people with disabilities. And when I say “people with disabilities,” I mean you, reader.
The disabled community has a saying: “If you live long enough, you’ll be one of us.” The Hunter bill might not affect you now, but it will when your elderly mother or your Wounded Warrior son has to rely on a wheelchair. Five years from now, when your son can’t get into a restaurant because there still is no ramp to the front door, you’ll ask, “How, after all this time, can this place still be inaccessible?” The answer – Duncan Hunter places the blame on your veteran son because he didn’t send a letter asking for a ramp in the five years before his visit. And unless your son finds out who owns the business and then sends a letter stating the obvious – “My wheelchair couldn’t get up your step” – changes might never be made. The notice provision simply changes the “wait until I’m sued” attitude to one of “wait until I get a letter.”
If Hunter truly wants to reduce the number of ADA lawsuits, without giving scofflaw businesses a free pass, he should support the notice proposed by the disabled community. It would require a statement in business license applications and renewals and in commercial property tax invoices telling business and commercial property owners that they must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It would identify resources of free information and, in California, would provide information about the new Certified Access Specialist Program, which was requested by the business community. It would cost next to nothing because it would be included in existing forms and it would be far more effective because it would reach all businesses and commercial property owners every single year.
In California, the business community opposed the provision. Because it would no longer be able to make the sensational argument that ADA lawsuits are “gotcha” lawsuits?
Vandeveld is a San Diego attorney who specializes in cases involving the Americans With Disabilities Act
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jun/25/businesses-must-comply-with-ada-not-ignore-it/
By Amy B. Vandeveld
midnight, June 25, 2011
Twenty years after passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act, many businesses still have made no effort to remove access barriers. Businessman George Coles and Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, want to provide protection for these scofflaw businesses – big and small – by imposing a nonsensical, burdensome notice requirement on people with disabilities. To garner support, the business community once again rolls out its talking points that paint business owners as “victims,” disabled plaintiffs as “opportunists,” and access design standards as “confusing” and “ever-changing.” The confused, hapless business owner hasn’t removed access barriers because he simply can’t understand what is expected of him, they tell us.
In reality, the ADA standards have only been changed once since 1990, in 2010. For two decades, free information about the ADA has been available to business owners, including the easy-to-read “ADA Guide for Small Businesses.” Everyone has heard about the ADA. So why is it that barriers still exist? Studies show that the real reason that most offending businesses still are not in compliance with the ADA is that they don’t want to spend any money removing access barriers – even when offered assistance to do so – until they’re forced to do so by litigation. To put it simply, they hedge their bets.
Rep. Hunter wants to provide cover for those scofflaw businesses who “roll the dice.” He wants people with disabilities to send “notice” letters to the “confused” business owners before a lawsuit can be filed. We’re assured that, once the notice is received, “most businesses would promptly fix the problem.”
So let’s analyze this. A person with a disability can be expected to know access design standards well enough to send notice, but a person savvy enough to run a business, understand labor laws, negotiate commercial lease agreements and file articles of incorporation is somehow intellectually inferior?
The real tragedy is that, under Hunter’s bill, scofflaw businesses get to sit back and make absolutely no effort to remove access barriers until a person with a disability gives “notice,” which could be never. That is exactly the point of the bill. We don’t need to guess how many businesses will take advantage of that free pass. More businesses will be inaccessible for longer periods of time, perhaps forever. All to the detriment of people with disabilities. And when I say “people with disabilities,” I mean you, reader.
The disabled community has a saying: “If you live long enough, you’ll be one of us.” The Hunter bill might not affect you now, but it will when your elderly mother or your Wounded Warrior son has to rely on a wheelchair. Five years from now, when your son can’t get into a restaurant because there still is no ramp to the front door, you’ll ask, “How, after all this time, can this place still be inaccessible?” The answer – Duncan Hunter places the blame on your veteran son because he didn’t send a letter asking for a ramp in the five years before his visit. And unless your son finds out who owns the business and then sends a letter stating the obvious – “My wheelchair couldn’t get up your step” – changes might never be made. The notice provision simply changes the “wait until I’m sued” attitude to one of “wait until I get a letter.”
If Hunter truly wants to reduce the number of ADA lawsuits, without giving scofflaw businesses a free pass, he should support the notice proposed by the disabled community. It would require a statement in business license applications and renewals and in commercial property tax invoices telling business and commercial property owners that they must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It would identify resources of free information and, in California, would provide information about the new Certified Access Specialist Program, which was requested by the business community. It would cost next to nothing because it would be included in existing forms and it would be far more effective because it would reach all businesses and commercial property owners every single year.
In California, the business community opposed the provision. Because it would no longer be able to make the sensational argument that ADA lawsuits are “gotcha” lawsuits?
Vandeveld is a San Diego attorney who specializes in cases involving the Americans With Disabilities Act
