Decision No. 300-AT-A-2000

Follow-up - Decision No. 553-AT-A-2000

April 28, 2000

File No. U 3570/99-66

---

APPLICATION

On December 8, 1999, Eric Norman filed with the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) the application set out in the title.

On January 10, 2000, Air Nova Inc. (hereinafter Air Nova) filed its answer to the application, and on January 20, 2000, the Agency received Mr. Norman's reply. Both parties subsequently filed additional comments.

On January 12, 2000, Agency staff requested that Air Nova provide a copy of its current procedures regarding the carriage of mobility aids and, more specifically, as they relate to "short-checking" wheelchairs. Air Nova provided the information on February 11, 2000. On March 2, 2000, Agency staff requested further clarifications from Air Nova.

Pursuant to subsection 29(1) of the Canada Transportation Act, the Agency is required to make its decision no later than 120 days after the application is received unless the parties agree to an extension. In this case, the parties have agreed to an extension of the deadline until April 28, 2000.

PRELIMINARY MATTER

Although Air Nova's answer was received after the prescribed deadline, the Agency, pursuant to section 6 of the National Transportation Agency General Rules, SOR/88-23, accepts this submission as being relevant and necessary to its consideration of this matter.

On March 10, 2000, Air Nova requested an extension until March 17, 2000, to provide the additional information requested by Agency staff on March 2, 2000.

ISSUES

The issues to be determined are whether the non-delivery of Mr. Norman's personal wheelchair at the aircraft door and the condition of the boarding chair that was used during his transfer to the connecting flight constituted undue obstacles to his mobility and, if so, what corrective measures should be taken.

FACTS

Eric Norman uses a lightweight folding wheelchair. On December 6, 1999, Mr. Norman was travelling from Ottawa, Ontario, to Gander, Newfoundland. A 50-minute stop was scheduled in Halifax, Nova Scotia, where Mr. Norman was to take a connecting flight to St. John's prior to his final destination. He had requested that his wheelchair be delivered at the aircraft door for his personal use during the stop and air carrier personnel in Ottawa had made the appropriate arrangements in this respect. The wheelchair was then to be checked for the remaining portion of his trip. Mr. Norman's wheelchair, however, was not delivered as requested and he was transferred directly to the connecting flight without being able to attend to personal matters as planned. Furthermore, the boarding chair that was used to transfer him to the gate for the flight to St. John's was found to be defective.

The flights were operated by Air Nova, however, Air Canada personnel who provide customer services on behalf of Air Nova were also involved in the incident. Furthermore, Air Nova implements the guidelines and policies established by Air Canada regarding the carriage and delivery of mobility aids.

POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

Mr. Norman states that he routinely transits through Halifax and usually plans his trips in view of being able to use airport washroom facilities as many passengers like himself are unable to use washrooms onboard most aircraft. He submits that upon checking in at Ottawa, the check-in agent had made appropriate arrangements to have his personal wheelchair delivered to the aircraft door in Halifax. She had affixed the "door" tag to his wheelchair, then checked it for the flight to Halifax where it would be retagged for carriage to St. John's. Mr. Norman submits, however, that upon arriving in Halifax there was a long wait onboard the aircraft and, contrary to his expectations, his wheelchair was not brought to him, although the agent and other Air Nova personnel in Halifax were waiting on the bridge expecting the chair to be delivered and one of the agents had the new tag to affix to Mr. Norman's wheelchair. Furthermore, Mr. Norman submits that all staff who were present on the bridge reacted with surprise when a ramp employee advised them that the wheelchair had been transferred to the next flight to St. John's. As a result, Mr. Norman was unable to have access to his own mobility aid because, in his opinion, someone had decided to ignore the tagging instructions on his wheelchair.

Mr. Norman is of the opinion that air carrier personnel should be aware of tagging on wheelchairs and observe the instructions they provide concerning "door" delivery. This should be recognized as necessary for the passenger to access his or her own mobility aid and not simply a question of comfort or preference. Air carrier personnel should not assume that a substitute mobility aid will be appropriate and they should respect a passenger's wishes. He is of the view that the purpose of the gate delivery and short-checking service is to ensure that passengers have the freedom and opportunity to attend to private matters without delay or interference. Mr. Norman submits that the aggravation he experienced as a result of this incident was twofold: firstly he was unable to use his own wheelchair as requested; secondly he was unable to use the washroom facilities as planned.

Mr. Norman also expresses concerns with respect to the boarding chair that was used to transfer him to the connecting flight to St. John's. He states that the chair was defective in that the restraining belts were both broken. In his opinion, boarding chairs should be inspected on a regular basis and removed from service when found to be defective. Mr. Norman is concerned that he and others in a similar situation may experience the same incident in the future.

Air Nova acknowledges that Mr. Norman's wheelchair had been "short-checked" by the agent in Ottawa. Therefore, it should have been made available to him during the stop in Halifax. Articles delivered through this procedure are usually tagged with a special baggage tag to indicate that they must be delivered to the gate for the customer to access. However, Air Nova indicates that there are no written procedures with respect to short-checking mobility devices. This is to avoid confusion among staff as Air Canada's policy is to tag all baggage to final destination. While air carrier staff will make arrangements for short-checking upon request, Air Nova submits that the use of a customer's wheelchair during ground stops or connections may cause flight delays. The use of airport wheelchairs is therefore encouraged. Additionally, the ability to offer short-checking services may depend on other factors such as the duration of the stop and flight operating times which could shorten the duration of the stop. The lay-out of the terminal is also a consideration. Air Nova states that it relies on the good judgement of its personnel and customers to determine under which circumstances the short-checking service will be appropriate.

Air Nova submits that the Air Canada Customer Service Manager on duty knew that Mr. Norman required wheelchair assistance to board and deplane and that he then had to be transferred to another wheelchair to move within the terminal. However, to spare Mr. Norman the aggravation of transferring from chair to chair, he decided to take him directly to the next flight to St. John's at a nearby gate. Additionally, he retagged the "short-checked" chair to its final destination. Mr. Norman refutes the statement that the manager had made the decision. In his opinion, the decision was actually made at the ramp level as evidenced by the carrier personnel's reaction when the wheelchair was not delivered.

Air Nova acknowledges that there was a breakdown in communications and submits that the guidelines are very clear concerning the boarding of mobility devices. Further, present policies allow customers to access their mobility devices during station stops. In this respect, Air Nova recognizes that Mr. Norman's request should have been honoured and that the decision to transfer his chair directly to the connecting flight should have been discussed with him. Air Nova extends its apologies for the service failure and submits that the airline industry is currently being restructured and that all customer service policies are under review at Air Canada and its affiliates. Consequently, procedures will not likely be revised in the immediate future.

With respect to the condition of the boarding chair, Air Nova acknowledges that it was defective. It submits that this was an older model provided by Air Canada and that this carrier has since removed all such boarding chairs at Halifax airport and replaced them with newer models. Additionally, Air Nova advises that it has also secured new boarding chairs and that they have all been inspected and found to be in excellent condition.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

In making its findings, the Agency has considered all of the material submitted by the parties during the pleadings.

The Agency has reviewed the information provided by Air Nova, including the excerpt from the Ramp Operations Manual on Special Customer Handling, Air Canada's policy regarding wheelchair acceptance at the aircraft door, as well as Air Canada's Training Manual entitled Serving Customers with Disabilities.

The procedures contained in the training manual for the carriage and delivery of personal wheelchairs to final destination clearly state that such mobility aids should receive priority handling and, where possible, be loaded in the aircraft hold in such a way that they may be off loaded first and promptly returned to the passenger. Additionally, the load agent should be advised of the location of the wheelchair in the hold. This is particularly important "when a connecting flight is involved." Furthermore, the mobility devices are to be properly tagged using a blue ACF 515W tag to alert ramp personnel to the fact that the wheelchairs are to be brought to the gate area.

While there are no written procedures with respect to "short-checking" mobility aids, as stated by Air Nova during pleadings, it does offer the service where possible. The training manual in this respect states that "if the connection time is short, [customer service agents should] offer the customer an aircraft to aircraft transfer of the wheelchair". Moreover, the fact that arrangements had been made by the agent in Ottawa is further evidence that Air Nova does provide the "short-checking" service. Air Nova acknowledged during pleadings that Mr. Norman's wheelchair had been properly tagged in Ottawa and that it should have been delivered to him during the stop in Halifax.

Despite the fact that Mr. Norman had requested that his personal wheelchair be brought to the aircraft during the stop, and that arrangements had been made in this respect, the Agency is of the opinion that the procedures in and of themselves did not lead to the misunderstanding that led to the incident described by Mr. Norman. The problem was rather the result of the decision taken unilaterally by one of the carrier's personnel in Halifax to transfer Mr. Norman directly to the flight to St. John's and to retag his wheelchair to final destination.

The Agency is of the opinion that the non-provision by Air Nova of the service that Mr. Norman had requested and expected to receive, that is the delivery of his personal wheelchair to the aircraft door, constituted an obstacle to his mobility as he was made to wait on the aircraft and was unable to use the washroom facilities as expected. The Agency finds the obstacle to have been undue as it could easily have been avoided if air carrier personnel had followed the tagging instructions on Mr. Norman's wheelchair and delivered it to the aircraft.

The Agency is aware of the current airline industry restructuring and recognizes that all customer service policies are under review at Air Canada and its affiliates and that procedures will not likely be revised in the immediate future. However, the Agency notes that Air Nova and all carriers involved should ensure, as they are revisiting existing policies and procedures, that the "short-checking" services are clearly defined and incorporated. The procedures should clearly describe the circumstances which would prevent the carrier from providing such a service, operational or otherwise.

The Agency is concerned with situations where an air carrier's employee makes a determination as to what is in the best interest of a passenger, without first consulting the passenger, and overlooks specific service requests made by this same traveller with a disability. Although in some cases it may be necessary to change prerequested services, it should not be done without consulting the person with a disability who made the initial request. The person should be advised of the circumstances which make it impossible for the carrier to provide the service.

On the issue of the condition of the airport boarding chair used to transfer Mr. Norman to the connecting flight to St. John's, the Agency notes that all older model boarding chairs have been replaced by new ones which are strategically positioned at various airport gates and that these have been inspected and found to be in excellent condition. The Agency is nonetheless concerned with the maintenance of such mobility aids. Regardless of the fact that the new chairs have been inspected and found to be in good condition, Air Nova provided no indication during pleadings that the boarding chairs are regularly inspected to ensure that they remain in good condition. The Agency recognizes that the chairs are newer models and that, normally, they should be in good condition. However, the Agency notes that the "older" models which have been replaced were once "new" chairs. The fact that the model used to transfer Mr. Norman was defective is, in the Agency's opinion, an indication that regular inspection and proper maintenance was not carried out. When the boarding chair in question was last used, the defects should have been noted and the chair removed for repair or replacement.

The Agency notes that during the pleadings concerning a previous application filed against Air Nova in September of 1997, which had resulted in Decision No. 79-A-1998 (Chaulk versus Air Nova), Air Nova made the following statement: "As a result of Mr. Chaulk's concerns, we have implemented a policy, where all mobility aids at our stations will be inspected and maintained as part of the yearly station audit." (Emphasis added). The Agency can only surmise that either the policy was not adhered to or, at the time of the incident, the yearly station audit at the Halifax airport was forthcoming. The feeling of insecurity experienced by Mr. Norman during his transfer to the corresponding flight only serves to underscore the importance of ensuring that airport equipment is regularly checked and removed for maintenance if found to be defective. Consequently, Air Nova should ensure that its policy concerning the periodic inspection and maintenance of airport boarding chairs is adhered to by all responsible employees at all its stations and that, when found to be defective, the mobility aids are removed for maintenance or replacement to avoid situations similar to the one experienced by Mr. Norman.

CONCLUSION

The Agency finds that the non-delivery of Mr. Norman's wheelchair at the aircraft door as requested and expected constituted an undue obstacle to his mobility.

In light of the foregoing, Air Nova is hereby directed to discuss the incident with the agents who were on duty on the day the incident occurred and, as a minimum, issue a bulletin at Halifax Airport reminding all employees of the importance of discussing with passengers and providing explanations as to why a requested service may not be provided.

Air Nova is requested to provide the Agency, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision, with a report on the corrective measures it has taken in cooperation with Air Canada in view of satisfying the above-noted requirement.

Air Nova is also requested to provide the Agency with a copy of its amended policies and procedures regarding the carriage of mobility aids, once revisited and amended. These should include the procedures concerning the short-checking services provided by the carrier.