Decision No. 65-AT-A-2007

February 9, 2007

February 9, 2007

IN THE MATTER OF Decision No. 476-AT-A-2006 dated September 1, 2006 - Ronald Rose vs Air Canada

File No. U3570/02-47


In its Decision No. 476-AT-A-2006 dated September 1, 2006, (hereinafter the Decision), the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) made a determination with respect to an application filed by Ronald Rose regarding the difficulties he experienced while travelling from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America on July 31, 2002, and during his return trip on August 12, 2002.

The Agency found that the failure by Air Canada to provide the assistance requested and required by Mr. Rose on his outbound flight from Vancouver to Milwaukee on July 31, 2002; the failure by Air Canada to provide Adult Unaccompanied Minor service (hereinafter Adult UM service) to Mr. Rose on his return flight from Milwaukee to Vancouver on August 12, 2002; and the failure by Air Canada's personnel to communicate with Mr. Crowhurst regarding Mr. Rose's disability, the services he required and the services available to him constituted undue obstacles to his mobility. As such, the Agency directed Air Canada to take the following corrective measures as set out in the Decision and indicated that it would review the appropriateness of the measures taken.

  • Amend its training module regarding the provision of services to persons with disabilities to incorporate this incident in order to ensure that similar incidents do not occur in the future. The training module should include a description of the situation that developed with respect to Mr. Rose, without naming him, as an example of what can happen when the lines of communication break down between its agents, including Meda Desk staff, and persons with disabilities, or persons making travel arrangements on their behalf, regarding the services that are available to them, and regarding the carrier's decisions as to the services that will be provided. The training module should also include information on cognitive/intellectual disabilities and a reminder of the services available to persons with disabilities, including Adult UM service, wheelchair assistance and Meet and Assist service, with an explanation of what each service entails, and should emphasize that it is the responsibility of carrier personnel to gain a comprehensive understanding of a person's disability by asking questions as required and providing a list of services available that are designed to meet the person's needs so that informed decisions can be made by passengers with disabilities regarding their travel choices.

In this regard, agents should be encouraged to use the Agency's Reservation Checklist when making reservations for persons with disabilities. The module should also reflect the importance of noting the nature of a passenger's disability and the services to be provided in his/her PNR, updating the PNR as the need arises and the importance of furnishing written confirmation of the services to be provided. Air Canada must also submit to the Agency a copy of the amendment to its training module and the time frame for completion of training its reservations and Meda Desk personnel on the updated module. In this regard, as a minimum, the training on the updated module should coincide with the refresher training, following the approval of the amendments by the Agency.

  • Report to the Agency on what policies and procedures have been developed to prevent the recurrence of a situation similar to that experienced by Mr. Rose, including:
  • the policies and procedures to be followed by reservation agents where a person identifies an intellectual disability;
  • the policies and procedures to be followed by the Meda Desk to ensure that its assessment of which passengers have an "intellectual disability" and therefore qualify for Adult UM services will not be unnecessarily restrictive;
  • the policies and procedures to be followed by the Meda Desk where information is lacking or unclear or where the Meda Desk intends to deny a requested service;
  • the procedures for ensuring that a decision that a passenger does not qualify for a particular type of service is promptly communicated to the passenger or the person making travel arrangements on his/her behalf; and
  • the procedures for ensuring that its reservation agents initiate a dialogue in order to fully understand the nature of a person's disability and the services he/she requires, and that they furnish written confirmation of the services to be provided to the person.
  • Issue a bulletin to its employees who may be required to interact with the public and/or make decisions in respect of services to be provided to persons with disabilities, such as its reservation agents and Meda Desk, summarizing the difficulties experienced by Mr. Rose, without naming him, and emphasizing the importance of the awareness of, and sensitivity to, the particular needs of travellers with disabilities. The bulletin should emphasize the importance of complete and open communication with passengers with disabilities or persons making travel arrangements on their behalf to correctly understand the nature of a passenger's disability and the services required and to seek clarification in this regard if necessary and, in situations where the Meda Desk is contemplating denying a request for a specific service, to immediately advise the person with the disability or the person making the travel arrangements on his/her behalf, that the service will not be provided, as required by Air Canada's policies and procedures. This bulletin should reinforce the importance of following the carrier's policies and procedures with respect to persons with disabilities and outline all the services Air Canada offers to passengers with disabilities and highlight Adult UM service for adult passengers with intellectual disabilities, in order to prevent a recurrence of Mr. Rose's unfortunate travel experience. As well, the Agency's Reservation Checklist should be highlighted as a useful tool to assist in ensuring that persons with disabilities receive the services that they require.

Air Canada was required to issue the bulletin within thirty (30) days from the date of the Decision, and provide a copy to the Agency. With respect to the remaining corrective measures, Air Canada was required to submit copies of the above-noted materials in draft form, within ninety (90) days from the date of the Decision and to obtain the Agency's written approval thereon, prior to Air Canada's finalization of the above-noted corrective measures, and the Agency indicated that it would review these materials and advise Air Canada as to whether they are satisfactory, as well as indicate the time frame within which the corrective measures must be finalized.

On September 27, 2006, Air Canada requested an extension until October 31, 2006, to comply with the third corrective measure in the Decision requiring Air Canada to issue a bulletin to its employees who may be required to interact with the public and/or make decisions in respect of services to be provided to persons with disabilities. In its Decision No. LET-AT-A-271-2006 dated October 6, 2006, the Agency granted this request. On October 30, 2006, Air Canada filed its response to the third corrective measure and on December 1, 2006, Air Canada filed its response to the first and second corrective measures in the Decision.

Preliminary matter

Although Air Canada filed its response to the first and second corrective measures in the Decision one day after the prescribed deadline, the Agency, pursuant to section 5 of the Canadian Transportation Agency General Rules, SOR/2005-35, accepts these submissions as being relevant and necessary to its consideration of this matter.

Conclusion

The Agency has reviewed the draft materials filed by Air Canada in response to the first two corrective measures in the Decision and is satisfied that the amended training module and policies and procedures to be followed by its reservation agents and Meda Desk agents when a passenger identifies an intellectual disability should be effective in preventing the recurrence of a situation similar to that experienced by Mr. Rose. As such, the Agency approves the amended training module and policies and procedures submitted by Air Canada and directs Air Canada to file copies of the finalized versions of these documents within 15 days from the date of this Decision. No further action will be necessary with respect to these corrective measures.

The Agency has considered the measures taken in response to the third corrective measure in the Decision (to issue a bulletin) and is satisfied that Air Canada has met the requirements of the Decision. As such, no further action is necessary with respect to this corrective measure.

Members

  • Beaton Tulk
  • Baljinder Gill
Date modified: