• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Myths and facts about the americans with disabilities act

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,892
Location
So. CA
14. Apr, 2014 by The Adaptables in News

MYTHS AND FACTS ABOUT THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

http://theadaptables.com/2014/04/myths-and-facts-about-the-americans-with-disabilities-act-2/

MYTH: ADA suits are flooding the courts.

FACT: The ADA has resulted in a surprisingly small number of lawsuits — only about 650 nationwide in five years. That’s tiny compared to the 6 million businesses; 666,000 public and private employers; and 80,000 units of state and local government that must comply.

MYTH: The ADA is rigid and requires businesses to spend lots of money to make their existing facilities accessible.

FACT: The ADA is based on common sense. It recognizes that altering existing structures is more costly than making new construction accessible. The law _only_ requires that public accommodations (e.g. stores, banks, hotels, and restaurants) remove architectural barriers in existing facilities when it is “readily achievable”, i.e., it can be done “without much difficulty or expense.” Inexpensive, easy steps to take include ramping one step; installing a bathroom grab bar; lowering a paper towel dispenser; rearranging furniture; installing offset hinges to widen a doorway; or painting new lines to create an accessible parking space.

MYTH: The government thinks everything is readily achievable.

FACT: Not true. Often it may not be readily achievable to remove a barrier — especially in older structures. Let’s say a small business is located above ground. Installing an elevator would not, most likely, be readily achievable — and there may not be enough room to build a ramp — or the business may not be profitable enough to build a ramp. In these circumstances, the ADA would allow a business to simply provide curbside service to persons with disabilities.

MYTH: The ADA requires businesses to remove barriers overnight.

FACT: Businesses are only required to do what is readily achievable at that time. A small business may find that installing a ramp is not readily achievable this year, but if profits improve it will be readily achievable next year. Businesses are encouraged to evaluate their facilities and develop a long-term plan for barrier removal that is commensurate with their resources.

MYTH: Restaurants must provide menus in braille.

FACT: Not true. Waiters can read the menu to blind customers.

MYTH: The ADA requires extensive renovation of all state and local government buildings to make them accessible.

FACT: The ADA requires all government programs, not all government buildings, to be accessible.

“Program accessibility” is a very flexible requirement and does not require a local government to do anything that would result in an undue financial or administrative burden. Local governments have been subject to this requirement for many years under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Not every building, nor each part of every building needs to be accessible. Structural modifications are required only when there is no alternative available for providing program access. Let’s say a town library has an inaccessible second floor. No elevator is needed if it provides “program accessibility” for persons using wheelchairs by having staff retrieve books.

MYTH: Sign language interpreters are required everywhere.

FACT: The ADA only requires that effective communication not exclude people with disabilities – which in many situations means providing written materials or exchanging notes. The law does not require any measure that would cause an undue financial or administrative burden.

MYTH: The ADA forces business and government to spend lots of money hiring unqualified people.

FACT: No unqualified job applicant or employee with a disability can claim employment discrimination under the ADA. Employees must meet all the requirements of the job and perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation. No accommodation must be provided if it would result in an undue hardship on the employer.

MYTH: Accommodating workers with disabilities costs too much.

FACT: Reasonable accommodation is usually far less expensive than many people think. In most cases, an appropriate reasonable accommodation can be made without difficulty and at little or no cost. A recent study commissioned by Sears indicates that of the 436 reasonable accommodations provided by the company between 1978 and 1992, 69% cost nothing, 28% cost less than $1,000, and only 3% cost more than $1,000.

MYTH: The government is no help when it comes to paying for accessibility.

FACT: Not so. Federal tax incentives are available to help meet the cost of ADA compliance.

MYTH: Businesses must pay large fines when they violate the ADA.

FACT: Courts may levy civil penalties only in cases brought by the Justice Department, not private litigants. The Department only seeks such penalties when the violation is substantial and the business has shown bad faith in failing to comply. Bad faith can take many forms, including hostile acts against people with disabilities, a long-term failure even to inquire into what the ADA requires, or sustained resistance to voluntary compliance. The Department also considers a business’ size and resources in determining whether civil penalties are appropriate. Civil penalties may not be assessed in cases against state or local governments or employers.

MYTH: The Justice Department sues first and asks questions later.

FACT: The primary goal of the Department’s enforcement program is to increase voluntary compliance through technical assistance and negotiation. Under existing rules, the Department may not file a lawsuit unless it has first tried to settle the dispute through negotiations — which is why most every complaint settles.

MYTH: The Justice Department never files suits.

FACT: The Department has been party to 20 suits under the ADA. Although it tries extensively to promote voluntary compliance, the Department will take legal action when entities continue to resist complying with the law.

MYTH: Many ADA cases involve frivolous issues.

FACT: The Justice Department’s enforcement of the ADA has been fair and rooted in common sense. The overwhelming majority of the complaints received by the Justice Department have merit. Our focus is on fundamental issues related to access to goods and services that are basic to people’s lives. We have avoided pursuing fringe and frivolous issues and will continue to do so.

MYTH: Everyone claims to be covered under the ADA.

FACT: The definition of “individual with a disability” is fraught with conditions and must be applied on a case-by-case basis.

MYTH: The ADA protects people who are overweight.

FACT: Just being overweight is not enough. Modifications in policies only must be made if they are reasonable and do not fundamentally alter the nature of the program or service provided. The Department has received only a handful of complaints about obesity.

MYTH: The ADA is being misused by people with “bad backs” and “emotional problems.”

FACT: Trivial complaints do not make it through the system. And many claims filed by individuals with such conditions are not trivial. There are people with severe depression or people with a history of alcoholism who are judged by their employers, not on the basis of their abilities, but rather upon stereotypes and fears that employers associate with their conditions.

Center For Independent Living

3908 Westpont Blvd. Ste. B

Winston-Salem, NC 27103

Phone: 336-767-7060

Fax: 336-760-7240

theadaptables@theadaptables.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
At 54 years old, I have had 3 different Chiropractors offer to write a letter approving me for a H/C hang tag due to my back. I have consistently refused as I am still able to walk from a regular parking space.
 
They make it sound reasonable, that's not what we are getting here when questions are asked about 1/2", a color, or some other minutiae. It is true that most cases don't make it through the legal system for those with the money to fight them in court, but it's a lot cheaper to just pay the blackmailers.
 
JBI said:
At 54 years old, I have had 3 different Chiropractors offer to write a letter approving me for a H/C hang tag due to my back. I have consistently refused as I am still able to walk from a regular parking space.
The requirements to obtain a H/C hang tag very from state to state but most of them say that you can't get one if you can walk a specific distance. Here in Kentucky that distance is 200' there also are other illnesses such as a heart condition with which you don't have to have a problem walking but in which the walking puts a strain on your part or some other organ. In reality in most states they are handed out like candy and just saying you need one gets you one. I wish more states were like New York and really policed the distribution of hangtags.
 
I was recently on vacation and launching a boat. The level of the lake is low and the parking lot is 1000' up hill from the water. If one has a HC Tag one can park on the side of the ramp at the bottom of the ramp. You can be able-bodied enough to launch a boat but not able to walk to your ride.

The ramp is marked no parking and there were a dozen truck and trailer. Several lacked hang tags. They got tickets. $71.80 The rangers ignore the vehicles with hang tags. When I retire I intend to get a yearly park pass and a hang tag.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jar546 said:
That's right. Everything that goes against your beliefs is propaganda.
Look how it's presented Jar.

For instance, it says, paraphrasing, the myth of the courts being flooded. First off, just saying that there are only 650 cases and then presuming that's a fair number, then ignoring all the civil cases, of which there are multiple thousands. That's just one thing.

The whole article is full of Inaccuracy and misconception.

A cursory fact check disproves much of their "facts". Thier lawsuit case numbers are off, and their assertions of what's reasonable is gauged by thier own metric. It is, by definition, propoganda.

But this is the normal response when you disprove someone's religion with logic and facts.

Brent
 
MYTH: The ADA is being misused by people with “bad backs” and “emotional problems.”FACT: Trivial complaints do not make it through the system. And many claims filed by individuals with such conditions are not trivial. There are people with severe depression or people with a history of alcoholism who are judged by their employers, not on the basis of their abilities, but rather upon stereotypes and fears that employers associate with their conditions.
This is a blatant attempt to smear employers. Prudent hiring practices are labeled stereotyping. As usual, the ADA lobby wants to do our thinking for us. If you listen to them long enough, you reach the conclusion that we are intrinsically evil.
 
I can present it differently using their same numbers, but presented by my own propaganda, as in;

The courts are flooded with over 650 lawsuits.

As you can see, I can guide what I want you to think just by the language I use. I could rewrite that whole article using their metrics, but 180 degrees out of phase, and support MY agenda, not theirs.

It's propaganda whether I agree with it or not.

Love and kisses.

Brent
 
In the 1950's my father-in-law had polio that affected one leg. He spent time in an iron lung and required a leg brace for walking. Did his own lawn care and snow removal until well into his eighties. Did not take advantage of handicap parking and such until he actually needed it. It seems that now everyone with a physical limitation feels entitled to some accomadation no matter the cost to others.
 
FACT: The primary goal of the Department’s enforcement program is to increase voluntary compliance through technical assistance and negotiation. Under existing rules, the Department may not file a lawsuit unless it has first tried to settle the dispute through negotiations — which is why most every complaint settles.
I agree with the statement

Unfortunately some states have not followed the DOJ's example and have adopted laws that allow a more proactive lawsuit environment and have thus tarnished the original intent of the civil rights law.
 
It looks like thier facts are cases brought by the DOJ, not private enforcement actions with demand letters for fix and pay attny fees.
 
Min&Max said:
It seems that now everyone with a physical limitation feels entitled to some accomadation no matter the cost to others.
Don't forget emotional limitations. And yes I agree, it's the entitlement issue that irks me most. The "Somebody OWES me" attitude.
 
Back
Top