[Nfbf-l] Guide dog policies and solutions

Thu May 2 10:56:45 UTC 2019

Excellent information, thank you so much
Janet

Sent from J Beyer’s iPhone, Have a Bless Day!

> On May 1, 2019, at 5:51 PM, Marion Gwizdala <marion.gwizdala at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> Janet,
> 
>    Airlines are governed by the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation. Airlines are prohibited from requiring any sort of documentation as a requirement of travel. Though some airlines "request" advance notification, veterinarian records, and documentation the animal has been trained, they may not require it as a prerequisite for carriage. Like the ADA, an airline may ask if an animal is required due to a disability and what tasks or work the dog has been trained to perform but may not require documentation of a disability or of the dog's training. Furthermore, if it is readily apparent the dog has been trained, e.g., it is observed performing a task or doing work, such as guiding a person who is blind or pulling a person's wheelchair,  they may not make such an inquiry. You are allowed to sit anywhere in the class of seat you have purchased, except in an exit row or in any place that might obstruct the aisle. You are not required to sit in the bulkhead and, even though most guide dog training programs advise this is the best seat, it does not offer a secure area for the dog should you encounter turbulence and impinges upon your leg room. Sitting in any other seat with the dog under the seat in front of you keeps the dog secure should turbulence be encountered. You definitely do not want your dog to become an 80-lb. missile in the cabin!
> 
>    Because the ACAA also allows for emotional support animals (ESAs) which are, by definition, untrained animals whose mere presence offers some benefit and individuals with ESAs are required to give 48 hours notice, prove they have ben vaccinated, and affirm the animal is trained to behave appropriately, many airline personnel attempt to apply the same policies to service animals. If you encounter an issue due to your guide dog, ask for the assistance of a complaint resolutions official (CRO).
> 
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janet Beyer [mailto:janetnfb at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2019 5:28 PM
> To: NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List
> Cc: Marion Gwizdala
> Subject: Re: [Nfbf-l] Guide dog policies and solutions
> 
> Can you please help me with the difference of airlines some requesting travel/health certificates for my guy dog.  Is that type of document also like his identification not to be provided or is this the only document that I need to provide some requirement and some don’t
> 
> Sent from J Beyer’s iPhone, Have a Bless Day!
> 
>> On May 1, 2019, at 2:59 PM, Marion Gwizdala via Nfbf-l <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Bill,
>> 
>>   I have written on this topic in the past and will reiterate - very
>> briefly - what I share as standard protocol, focusing upon the topic at hand
>> concerning one's allergies to dog dander. First of all, the law classifies
>> individuals with disabilities as a protected class, prohibiting
>> discrimination on the basis of belonging to that class. Other protected
>> classes protected by law include race, creed, ethnicity, gender, and gender
>> identification. An individual with a disability accompanied by a service dog
>> has the legal right to access the goods and services of a public
>> (governmental)  entity under Title II of the ADA, and those of private
>> entities providing public accommodations under title III of the Act. The
>> only exceptions would be if the presence of a service animal poses a direct
>> threat, defined as "a significant risk to the health or safety of others
>> that cannot be eliminated by a reasonable modification of policies
>> practices, or procedures", if the animal is out of control and the handler
>> does not take immediate, effective measures to correct the behavior, or if
>> the animal is not housebroken. It is important to note here that it must be
>> demonstrated the presence of the dog poses a direct threat; it cannot be
>> assumed; furthermore, I do not need to prove my dog does not pose a direct
>> threat. This is known as an affirmative defense. In other words, one must
>> prove something does exist not that something does not exist. 
>> 
>>   The statistical information about the prevalence of an allergy to
>> dog dander that rises to the level of a disability is, as stated in my
>> previous message, <0.005%, or 5 in 100,000. According to this research,
>> those with such an allergy would have severe anaphylaxis even if the dander
>> were present on a person's clothing, even if a dog were not physically
>> present. 
>> 
>>   If an individual claiming an allergy to dog dander objects to the
>> presence of the dog, it is up to the individual with the allergy to take
>> appropriate measures to mitigate the situation; it is not up to the
>> individual with a disability to take such measures, as that person is a
>> member of a protected class whose rights preempt the person not a member of
>> that class. So, if I enter a restaurant in which the only seat is near
>> someone claiming an allergy to my dog, it is up to the individual with the
>> allergy to mitigate that situation. In the case of a passenger on para
>> transit, it is understood that the transportation is a shared ride service
>> and that there may be times an individual will be required to share that
>> ride with someone with a service animal. If my ride arrives and a fellow
>> passenger objects to the presence of my guide dog, it is up to the provider
>> to make other arrangements for that passenger, not to deny my ride.
>> 
>>   If a person has an allergy to dog dander that rises to the level of
>> a disability, we now have what is known as "competing interests". Two
>> members of a protected class are now competing for the same protections. In
>> such a case, the person first served is secured the right and the second
>> person will need to mitigate the situation. In the para transit
>> illustration, if I am the second person with competing interests, I will
>> need to wait for another ride. This would not be considered discriminatory 
>> 
>>   In all cases involving allegations of discrimination based upon
>> membership in a protected class, the first requirement is to demonstrate
>> standing. This means that, should I file a complaint alleging discrimination
>> based upon the presence of my guide dog, I would need to demonstrate two
>> elements before the case would be heard: I would first need to demonstrate
>> that I am a person with a disability protected by the law under which I file
>> a complaint and that my guide dog meets the definition of "service animal",
>> "any dog individually trained to perform tasks or do work for the benefit of
>> a person with a disability". Failure to prove these two elements would cause
>> a nolle proc or dismissal of the case.
>> 
>>   If there are any questions, I am happy to answer them so we, as
>> advocates, can provide the most accurate information.
>> 
>> Fraternally yours,
>> Marion
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nfbf-l [mailto:nfbf-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Bill Outman via
>> Nfbf-l
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2019 1:44 PM
>> To: 'NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List'
>> Cc: Bill Outman
>> Subject: [Nfbf-l] Guide dog policies and solutions
>> 
>> Good afternoon, list.  
>> 
>> I have noted with interest the recent discussion about guide policies
>> relating to the paratransit contractor that has graciously volunteered to
>> provide transportation service to those leaving the convention on Memorial
>> Day.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Marion, your expertise on the detials of the law is unquestioned.  Yet I am
>> troubled by seeming lack of consideration for those who may be facing a
>> legitimate issue.  I understand this issue has been used as a cover
>> discriminatory actions borne out of ignorance, but I have a difficult time
>> believing this is the case in every instance.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Those of us who profess a Christian faith are called to not only consider
>> our rights but also show due concern to the rights and needs of others as
>> well.  We cannot just say, "Sorry, Charlie" to those who may be facing
>> difficult challenges such as an allergy that we may not always be aware of.
>> The vehicle space issue, yes, has been abused, but at some point does have
>> some legitimacy, as vehicles are of finite size.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> What I need you to do is propose an affirmative solution, not just state
>> what is prohibited in law and regulation, to these issues.  What
>> accomodations/arrangements are permitted, and would in fact be adoptable as
>> best practices, that would satisfy both the legal requirement for equal
>> treatment and address the health and safety needs of other riders/drivers of
>> various modes of transport?  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I don't want us to merely state what we are against, but what we would be in
>> favor of.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Bill Outman 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nfbf-l mailing list
>> Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> Nfbf-l:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/marion.gwizdala%40verizo
>> n.net
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nfbf-l mailing list
>> Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Nfbf-l:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/janetnfb%40gmail.com
> 