Qantas Passenger Discrimination Case

[kangarooflyer88]

Seems like Qantas had to be taken to Federal Court after denying travel to an individual with accessibility challenges because they needed to travel with their guide dog. Ultimately Qantas settled and has changed their policy regarding guide dogs.

9News has the story:

Qantas to improve assistance dog processes after discrimination case

www.9news.com.au

 

[Lynda2475]

Noting that Guide Dogs (for blind people) are different from assistance dogs - the passenger who sued did not have a guide dog and their "assistance dog" was not accredited by one of the recognized organizations.

I used to frequently see a blind passenger and his guide dog (Labrador) on my regular QF flights to and from Melbourne, the crew all knew both passenger and dog well. Never any issues.

Assistance dogs trained by accredited organizations are also allowed to fly, unfortunately there are some companies training dogs to assist people who are not up to the same standards.

Agree that a national standard is required for assistance dogs.

IMO to be allowed to fly proof that the assistance being provided is related to mobility / independent travel should be required none of the US style anxiety pet bs.

This case seems to me to be a matter of the passenger not checking requirements to fly QF and assuming that VA (who are about to also allow pets in cabin) rules were universal.

 

[Cynicor]

Important distinctions to be made, thanks Lynda2475

 

[Quickstatus]

This will be a dilution of the standards regarding "assistance animals". Soon any animal can be an assistance animal or emotional support animal.

 

[MARTINE]

This will be a dilution of the standards regarding "assistance animals". Soon any animal can be an assistance animal or emotional support animal.

That probably explains the number of dogs who roam about our supermarket with their owner. One had a handwritten sign about how he ‘assists’ the owner

 

[Lynda2475]

I saw a lady with a small poodle wearing an assistance dog vest at the theatre recently. Being carried up the stairs the poodle wasn't helping her navigate the environment etc. The dog did sit quietly throughout the performance, but on the way out I overhead her telling someone that is was for anxiety, hmmn.

 

[p--and--t]

Seems like Qantas had to be taken to Federal Court after denying travel to an individual with accessibility challenges because they needed to travel with their guide dog. Ultimately Qantas settled and has changed their policy regarding guide dogs.

9News has the story:

Qantas to improve assistance dog processes after discrimination case

www.9news.com.au

Actually as I interpret the article it says Qantas changed the policy about how to get approval, not changed their standards on who gets approved

"The Qantas service dog policy and the minimum standards required for service dogs has not changed…”

 

[muppet]

I’m glad QF has a policy and enforces it, although it needs to be simple and fair to deal with. I don’t want US-style flights that look more like a farm than public transport for humans.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Noting that Guide Dogs (for blind people) are different from assistance dogs - the passenger who sued did not have a guide dog and their "assistance dog" was not accredited by one of the recognized organizations.

You’re correct that there is a distinction between the two of them but nonetheless assistance dogs can be seen as forming a vital role in someone’s accessibility requirements. That the dog does not have accreditation from a recognized body, however, should not necessarily prohibit them from boarding with the passenger. For instance, some assistance dogs may receive specialized training to handle very unique medical conditions of the passenger (e.g. seizure) and such training may not be recognized by broad accreditation societies.

The other issue this story brings up is the lack of legislation in Australia when it comes to accessible transport. In places like the EU and Canada, such laws exist and when airlines fail to make accommodations to passengers steep civil penalties arise. And don’t even get me started on the prohibition of a disability tax more commonly referred to as one fare, one passenger(something which to my knowledge is still allowed in Australia)

 

[p--and--t]

I’m glad QF has a policy and enforces it, although it needs to be simple and fair to deal with. I don’t want US-style flights that look more like a farm than public transport for humans.

While not perfect by a long shot, they are lots of differences that cause us to be referred to as the lucky country (including by several close friends of ours who were born and raised in the US).

 

[Lynda2475]

That the dog does not have accreditation from a recognized body, however, should not necessarily prohibit them from boarding with the passenger.

Absolutely it should. Otherwise every tom, dick and harry will bring their favourite four legged friend on board claiming it is an assistance animal (hello USA).

If you need a dog to genuinely assist with a physical limitation or medical condition, then get one via an accredited facility; or pay to have it certified by one.

The other issue this story brings up is the lack of legislation in Australia when it comes to accessible transport.

Evidence?

Public transport in Australia is very accessible compared with much of the world.

In NSW all railway stations and light rail stations are accessible via wheelchair be it at street level, compliant ramp or lift. If you wait at correct location, staff will place a ramp to bridge the platform gap to board the train. Many stations in London and NYC still have no lifts.

Public busses can be lowered and have ramp and dedicate places for wheelchair passengers and those with limited mobility. Airlines provide wheel chair assistance. Some taxi licenses are contingent on being wheelchair accessible.

But a dog is not a person, and a non accredited assistance dog is just a pet.

And don’t even get me started on the prohibition of a disability tax more commonly referred to as one fare, one passenger(something which to my knowledge is still allowed in Australia)

We dont have a single fare structure. People on disability pension or NDIS support get concession cards which makes public transport significantly cheaper, some also get subsidized taxis and other community transport programs.

But a disabled person with a good job, pays the usual adult fare. I have worked with a few colleagues who are legally blind and they happily pay the same train fare as you and I because they receive the same service and expecting charity disrespects their ability.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Public transport in Australia is very accessible compared with much of the world.

But we aren’t talking about public transport, we’re talking about commercial flights.

We dont have a single fare structure. People on disability pension or NDIS support get concession cards which makes public transport significantly cheaper, some also get subsidized taxis and other community transport programs.

Again, the point I’m making here is that for commercial flights if you are disabled you have to pay more for your fare. In particular, those with accessibility issues who require a carer to travel or even some bulky medically necessary equipment must pay extra for that. In other parts of the world, the person with an accessibility concern wouldn’t have to pay a cent more.

 

[downgraded]

But we aren’t talking about public transport, we’re talking about commercial flights.

Again, the point I’m making here is that for commercial flights if you are disabled you have to pay more for your fare. In particular, those with accessibility issues who require a carer to travel or even some bulky medically necessary equipment must pay extra for that. In other parts of the world, the person with an accessibility concern wouldn’t have to pay a cent more.

You might want to check who pays. The NDIS and state schemes provide a lot of support for those in genuine need.

 

[p--and--t]

But we aren’t talking about public transport, we’re talking about commercial flights.

Again, the point I’m making here is that for commercial flights if you are disabled you have to pay more for your fare. In particular, those with accessibility issues who require a carer to travel or even some bulky medically necessary equipment must pay extra for that. In other parts of the world, the person with an accessibility concern wouldn’t have to pay a cent more.

More opinion or fact?

 

[Lynda2475]

Again, the point I’m making here is that for commercial flights if you are disabled you have to pay more for your fare.

No a disabled person does not pay more than an able-bodied person who books the same seat at the same time.

There is no additional charge for a genuine accredited guide or service dog to fly with its owner.in the cabin.

In particular, those with accessibility issues who require a carer to travel or even some bulky medically necessary equipment must pay extra for that. In other parts of the world, the person with an accessibility concern wouldn’t have to pay a cent more.

Again untrue re medical equipment and aids, unless you can provide an example.

For example Qantas allow CPAP machines as carry-on luggage. they also allow passengers to check in CPAP machines for free.

They also allow passengers check in two pieces of mobility equipment for free.

And there are concessions for carers. Qantas Carer Concession Card - People with Disability Australia

 

[kangarooflyer88]

More opinion or fact?

No. It’s a fact. Australia has no law obligating airlines to waive fees on passengers with disabilities. Yes there are concession cards but that only reduces the burden by maybe 50%. A discount on a tax doesn’t make the tax go away. Contrast that with other nations like Canada where airlines are not allowed to charge disabled customers more.

 

[Lynda2475]

I don't think you understand what a tax is. The government does not impose extra taxes on disabled people because they are disabled or on those who care for a disabled person. In fact disabled people often receive more in government assistance than they pay in taxes.

Except in case of travelling for medical treatment (and we have the RFDS and air ambulances to provide that outside of commercial flights) no one has to fly, they choose to. Why should tax payers fund free air travel for the disabled?

Where do you draw the line? My elderly Mum can't fly on her own, so family flies with her but we don't expect the government to pay.

NdIS and health budgets are already stretched thin, we don't need to break the system by offering free holidays.

 

[Himeno]

Evidence?

Public transport in Australia is very accessible compared with much of the world.

In NSW all railway stations and light rail stations are accessible via wheelchair be it at street level, compliant ramp or lift. If you wait at correct location, staff will place a ramp to bridge the platform gap to board the train. Many stations in London and NYC still have no lifts.

Public busses can be lowered and have ramp and dedicate places for wheelchair passengers and those with limited mobility. Airlines provide wheel chair assistance. Some taxi licenses are contingent on being wheelchair accessible.

The public buses in Canberra were required to retire their older Renault buses in part because they weren't wheelchair accessible. They removed them from service a few months ago, with the 4 remaining vehicles used solely for driver training.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I don't think you understand what a tax is. The government does not impose extra taxes on disabled people because they are disabled or on those who care for a disabled person. In fact disabled people often receive more in government assistance than they pay in taxes.

I use the term tax to refer to the fees airlines impose on disabled passengers. So sure technically not a government collected tax but a tax on their liberty a barrier to their accessibility. As for those people with disabilities receiving more in money from the government than they pitch in, well that’s part of our social contract and how taxes work. Some people will pay more to the government than they feel they receive and vice-versa. Importantly, people with a disability don’t have the luxury to choose to see or walk. If they could choose I have no doubt they would rather live in an environment where they face no such barriers. And since we cannot cure blindness or other disabilities, the best we can do is make things as accessible to them as possible.

Except in case of travelling for medical treatment (and we have the RFDS and air ambulances to provide that outside of commercial flights) no one has to fly, they choose to. Why should tax payers fund free air travel for the disabled?

I never said the government had to. Indeed, under the law in Canada, the airlines need to provide the service so they are the ones paying.

Where do you draw the line? My elderly Mum can't fly on her own, so family flies with her but we don't expect the government to pay.

This is where the law at least in Canada makes it very clear. You need to have a disability and need to show that you must travel with an attendant. So it’s not a free for all. Please realize, there are many people in society who have a disability that require this level of attention to travel safely. Why should they have to pay for something that is an extension of themselves?

More details on one fare one passenger here:

https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/publication/additional-seating-and-one-person-one-fare-requirement-domestic-travel-a-guide

NdIS and health budgets are already stretched thin, we don't need to break the system by offering free holidays.

Airlines cover one fare one passenger just as they cover compensation when travellers get delayed.

-RooFlyer88

 

[Lynda2475]

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