Qantas Passenger Discrimination Case

[kangarooflyer88]

And our airlines do not impose extra fees on disabled passengers above able-bodied passengers.

Except if they have a medically necessary attendant or in any way don’t meet the definition of an ordinary passenger (e.g., requiring an extra seat for a medically necessary reason).

Anyway, I think this distracts from the point of the thread which surrounds Qantas’ handling of service animals. Yes accreditation is ideal but it’s not necessary, certainly if you can show it has been trained and have a doctors note to backup the medical need. I don’t think anyone wants travel in Australia to devolve into the state in the United States where you call your pet an emotional support animal. But there is a clear need for those with disabilities to be treated with dignity and respect by the airlines and certainly a need for them to do their bit to reduce barriers to accessibility. For instance, I think some of us would consider it inappropriate for an airline to force someone with cerebral palsy to drag themselves down the aisle of an airplane because they couldn’t get them a wheelchair. This happened in Canada and was a violation of the accessible air passenger transportation regulations. The airline (Air Canada) had to fork out nearly $100,000 on that incident alone.

 

[p--and--t]

Except if they have a medically necessary attendant or in any way don’t meet the definition of an ordinary passenger (e.g., requiring an extra seat for a medically necessary reason).

Anyway, I think this distracts from the point of the thread which surrounds Qantas’ handling of service animals. Yes accreditation is ideal but it’s not necessary, certainly if you can show it has been trained and have a doctors note to backup the medical need. I don’t think anyone wants travel in Australia to devolve into the state in the United States where you call your pet an emotional support animal. But there is a clear need for those with disabilities to be treated with dignity and respect by the airlines and certainly a need for them to do their bit to reduce barriers to accessibility. For instance, I think some of us would consider it inappropriate for an airline to force someone with cerebral palsy to drag themselves down the aisle of an airplane because they couldn’t get them a wheelchair. This happened in Canada and was a violation of the accessible air passenger transportation regulations. The airline (Air Canada) had to fork out nearly $100,000 on that incident alone.

You make huge generalisations that do not apply in many cases and have not demonstrated they always end up paying more.

Supply of evidence of same would be helpful.

I presume you are aware persons who require a carer to assist with travel to medical treatment in some states have their fare paid for them or receive a substantial subsidy so they are not paying more than a regular passenger or anything at all.

Most if not all travel on discounted fares. As pointed out above, airlines do not charge for medically required items like wheelchair assistance, carriage of CPAP machines, accredited service animals et al.

My mother is 98 with a number of medical conditions. She pays very little or nothing for much of her travel, nothing for her medical, has subsidised rent, utilities, required products to assist her lifestyle.

“Yes accreditation is ideal but it’s not necessary,”

Your opinion at variance with gov, airline and other authorities.

 

[nancypants]

Without delving too much into the ethics of the thing, as an NT based health professional working with a significant number of disability clients who have assistance dogs, part of our issue is there isn’t necessarily access to the Qantas approved accrediting organisations without going interstate. If memory serves last time I checked they were only accepting accreditation from two organisations, likely NSW and VIC based. How does one get ones essential assistance dog from wherever to those places without being able to fly?

Assistance Dogs in the NT For the NT – PAWS Darwin

pawsdarwin.org.au

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Just to get the discussion back on topic, one thing that's unclear in the story is what impact this "agreement" has on how Qantas handles service animals. Quoting from the original story posted:

"The Qantas service dog policy and the minimum standards required for service dogs has not changed, and safety remains Qantas' number one priority," a spokesperson said.

So it would seem that nothing changes aside from perhaps how they communicate these requirements to their customers. I am however, surprised that it did settle, as I would have loved to see regulators come in and clarify the situation further.

You make huge generalisations that do not apply in many cases and have not demonstrated they always end up paying more.

Supply of evidence of same would be helpful.

One notable example in recent memory was the story of Anwen Handmer who was given the choice of either paying for four economy seats, or two business class seats to fly with Qantas. This is very much a case of a disability tax being imposed by the airline on the most vulnerable in our community and is unethical to say the least. All because she uses a wheelchair. In Canada this practice would be illegal under the principle of one fare one passenger (OFOP). Quoting from the story:

Weeks of confusion and back and forth ensued.

Eventually it boiled down to two options:

• two seats in business class at 50 per cent off due to Ms Handmer's Qantas concession card (which came to $6,395)
• four seats in economy — to allow her more space — at full price (which came to more than $8,000)

I presume you are aware persons who require a carer to assist with travel to medical treatment in some states have their fare paid for them or receive a substantial subsidy so they are not paying more than a regular passenger or anything at all.

Discounts are nice, but again they shouldn't be necessary. Certainly the NDIS shouldn't be picking up the tab for something the airline which should (by law) be accommodating passenger's disability. Imagine the amount of financial stress the NDIS would be relieved from if they didn't have to subsidize the accommodations airlines refuse to offer for disabled passengers for free. Heck, they could probably even afford to completely cover the regular economy fare for the passenger.

Most if not all travel on discounted fares. As pointed out above, airlines do not charge for medically required items like wheelchair assistance, carriage of CPAP machines, accredited service animals et al.

You are absolutely right. For some things the airlines don't charge. But for other disabilities, they are raking in the money (see the above story). Perhaps this is just a Canadian thing, but I don't think treating someone differently because of something completely outside their control is fair. People don't generally choose to be paraplegic, blind or have some accessibility need. As a society we need to make reasonable accommodations for them.

“Yes accreditation is ideal but it’s not necessary,”

Your opinion at variance with gov, airline and other authorities.

I am not aware of any government regulation which states that those with disabilities are obligated to have their service animals accredited by a specific organization. And as others have pointed out, it's not as easy as you think this accreditation business. It's very easy for those of us who don't face accessibility challenges to think everything is straightforward. I am inclined to believe it is not and that the road to doing everything, "by the book," is paved with hurdles which make in inaccessible to those with disabilities.