[blindlaw] Format Question

Thu Dec 11 20:33:28 UTC 2008

They have moved to where alot of things can be done for social security payments online and changing of info, etc. just not for SSI for some reason.

> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:21:14 -0500
> From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> 
> Maybe someone is closer to the case than am I, but my understanding was
> that the ACB and others are concerned with paper notices an dnot with
> web access.  One can imagine a day when we can access social security
> notices from our personal accounts on the web but so far the agency has
> not moved to that sort of aproach.
> Jim McCarthy 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> On Behalf Of b75205 at gmail.com
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 12:26 PM
> To: Dennis Clark; blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> 
> Dennis:
> 
> The ACB lawsuit is against Social Security and they are the ones doing
> the "hand holding" as they are concentrating on making everything turned
> into text but unformatted text or text made from PDF files is usually a
> mess, especially if it was created using a mac in InDesign and
> translated into a PDF file on a Windows based computer and then turned
> into a text file. You see this stuff all the time, and it looks like
> people just do not care but in reality they did not consider the
> transition from one format to the other.
> 
> The NFB lawsuit is great, it finally breaches the gap from the public to
> the private sector. I tried to do this with the National Voter
> Registration form by showing that if the states were willing to deny the
> right to vote to people because they made their voter registration forms
> incaccessible then we could use the laws of the Voting Rights Act to
> force Integration under the Civil rights Act of 1964 which enables the
> 14th Amendment Section
> 2 to be imposed upon the states if they do not comply, and this would to
> everyone in the state, not just the public sector.
> 
> Social Security was required to be accessible to the blind 35 years ago
> under the Rehabiliation Act of 1973. There is no excuse. They were
> required to do this in 1998 under Section 508 of the Rehabiliation Act
> and here is the law.
> http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=3
> What we need here is a review of accessibility law and make sure
> everyone understands that the federal government mandated accessibility
> years ago and nobody has complied.
> 
> And they have not complied because IT people refuse to do it. It is that
> simple. Managers have been told that it is too expensive or that it is
> impossible. That's Bull. It can be done and it can be done when people
> make the documents, and the only thing preventing accessibility is the
> knowledge of how to do it and the pride of IT officials who do not know
> how to do it and refuse to budge and learn.
> 
> The Target lawsuit is so out of whack I cannot beleive it. The problem
> with Target is that they probably are using an old database and so they
> would have to get a new one. Chances are they have not updated their
> software.  
> That could be rather expensive but they will have to do it anyway, just
> for security issues alone. Target has always had a corporate mentality
> of being able to do anything they want and so when the federal
> government mandates things to them, they tend to consider it a nuisance
> and so they are not handling this well at all. You would think that
> given they just lost the case they would have fixed their site by now,
> but they haven't. And what is amazing is that it is so easy to do this.
> Accessibility is easy to those who know how to do it. This is what
> accessibility gets down to is using new software and having the right
> people who know how to write code properly create the websites with the
> idea that accessibility is the prime issue.
> 
> Many people in IT think that if you make a website standards compliant
> that that makes it accessible, but you have to put accessibility
> features into the site.
> Of coure Targets site is not web standards compliant. No, Target needs
> to fire its IT People and hire people who will keep them out of
> lawsuits. The costs of the lawyers and the settlement could have been
> put into updating their database and hiring people to fix their site.
> Also if they fix their site they would be able to use it on Cell phones
> and Iphones. The transition to Web 2 is almost the same requirements to
> start a website to accessibility, so Target is still in the dark ages of
> web design.
> 
> This is such a waste.
> 
> The reality of Accessibility is that it shows that IT people have no
> clue what they are doing and they are getting caught. They are getting
> caught being unprofessional, they are getting caught writing code that
> is written badly, they are illiterate when it comes to writing computer
> code.
> 
> They are leaving their corporations out to dry.
> 
> James Pepper
> On Dec 9, 2008 9:25am, Dennis Clark <dennisgclark at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> >
> > Good to see you on the list. I lost track of you after law school, and
> 
> > I
> am happy to see that the bar exam is behind you and that you are now in
> practice. In your message you referred to another "ACB, let's all hold
> blind folks hands, as they cannot help themselves lawsuit." I assume you
> are referring to the law suit against Target and that was actually
> launched with the support of the NFB and litigated by the Disability
> Rights Advocates in California. I am personally pleased that the NFB did
> this, but I will admit I am aggressive on this point, and I have no
> problem forcing even private entities such as Target to be fully
> accessible to the blind.  
> The Target action can of course be argued as "hand holding," since there
> are alternatives for reading any website, such as using a reader, or the
> free market solution of simply shopping at a store which demonstrates
> that it wants the business of blind people by offering an accessible
> website, but I don't subscribe to that argument. After all, everything
> is accessible if we use sighted assistance, but the accessibility
> alternative needs to be practical, not just plausible.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Forcing the Social Security Administration to provide accessible
> communications is an even easier philosophical question for me, because
> unlike Target, the government is not a private entity. There are many
> shopping alternatives available to us other than Target, but we are
> forced to interact with the Social Security Administration.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Also, the Social Security Administration use to telephone blind
> recipients to tell them about any problems or written communications
> being mailed to them, so we are not asking them to do something new or
> unworkable. I know for a fact that this was true in 2004, because I
> represented someone before the Social Security Administration, and this
> procedure was already in place and was offered as part of the solution
> to my client's problem.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > As a matter of law, and in addition to the 504 argument, I think a 
> > strong
> constitutional argument can be made as a matter of due process if it is
> the case that there is a property interest in Social Security payments.
> It is likely that there is no property interest in SSI payments, but I
> am confident there is with SSDI and retirement payments since they
> result from money paid into Social Security by the recipient.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I look forward to hearing others thoughts on this matter.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
> >
> >
> > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> >
> >
> > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:22 PM
> >
> >
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I actually agree with you. I am more concerned about the lack of 
> > activity
> regarding inaccessible web sites and the use of sucdh formats such as
> captia and flash formats where image text is presented not bering
> readable by screen readers.
> >
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " joramsey at cox.net>
> >
> >
> > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> >
> >
> > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:09 AM
> >
> >
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Chuck,
> >
> >
> > I have no dispute that we should be able to receive communications in 
> > an
> >
> >
> > accessible format, but I am just not ready for another ACB, let's all 
> > hold
> >
> >
> > blind folks hands, as they cannot help themselves lawsuit.
> >
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Gainesville, FL 32609
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Phone: (352) 505-6642
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> >
> > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> 
> > On
> >
> >
> > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
> >
> >
> > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:41 AM
> >
> >
> > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> >
> >
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Its interesting because I recall many years ago that SSA used to say 
> > that
> >
> >
> > materials were available in Braille and people could receive
> communications
> >
> >
> > from them in Braille. This was back in the 60's when I was growing up.
> I'm
> >
> >
> > not sure what the extent of this was or if or when it was
> discontinued.
> >
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kathleen Hagen" khagen12 at q.com>
> >
> >
> > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> >
> >
> > Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 1:24 PM
> >
> >
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Format Question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > John, There is a certified class for blind social security recipients
> >
> >
> > in
> >
> >
> > which they are suing the SSA for accessible documents. That does not
> mean
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > that SSA is providing alternative formats for consumer's materials
> yet.
> >
> >
> > And they probably won't for some time while they spend the taxpayers'
> >
> >
> > money figuring out how to avoid it. They do hire blind people and they
> >
> >
> > provide general materials in braille at least. But your friend
> shouldn't
> >
> >
> > expect to see her consumer-related material in alternative format any
> time
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > soon.
> >
> >
> > Kathy Hagen
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " joramsey at cox.net>
> >
> >
> > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> >
> >
> > Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 11:09 AM
> >
> >
> > Subject: [blindlaw] Format Question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> >
> > i am on another NFB list and an individual seems to be under the
> >
> >
> > impression
> >
> >
> > that the Social Security Administration is violating her rights
> because
> >
> >
> > she
> >
> >
> > received the cost of living increase letter in the same format that
> >
> >
> > everyone
> >
> >
> > else receives the notice. Apparently this is just a standard letter in
> a
> >
> >
> > standard envelope. I am personally not aware of any law that requires
> an
> >
> >
> > entity to send "accessible" letters to everyone that might have a
> visual
> >
> >
> > disability. If this is the law, can someone point me to the section of
> >
> >
> > the
> >
> >
> > CFR that contains such a requirement?
> >
> >
> > Cordially,
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Gainesville, FL 32609
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Phone: (352) 505-6642
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >
> >
> > blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/khagen12%40q.c
> om
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >
> >
> > blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbc
> glob
> >
> >
> > al.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >
> >
> > blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >  
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox
> .net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> 
> blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >  
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbc
> global.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> 
> blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >  
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dennisgclark%4
> 0sbcglobal.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > blindlaw mailing list
> >
> >
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> 
> blindlaw:
> >
> >
> >  
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail
> .com
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nf
> b.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/timandvickie%40hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________
Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills.
http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_speed_122008