They got into the mall because an earlier security guard relaxed the rules to allow the men’s sister to take wheelchairs to the car. She also had her two developmentally delayed children (who I think were fairly grown up) with her. Quite a handful, really.
I suspect that they used borrowed wheelchairs on this occasion because her car wasn’t big enough for four passengers and two wheelchairs.
Yeah, if this was in the Pit, I’d really be saying what I think.
I thought muscular dystrophy affected the legs first. Is it possible that at least one of them has enough arm strength to push the wheelchair himself?
And since they were visiting from out of town, it seems plausible that their sister’s car wasn’t large enough to carry two wheelchairs.
Why would that be surprising? Idiocy and mean-spiritedness come in every gender, shape, size, color and flavor of humanity. They’re two things at which we humans excel.
Several years ago Joe Foss, once-famed WWII flying ace, was detained by zealous airport security troglodytes because his once-famed Congressional Medal of Honor was recognized only as a metal object with sharp edges. America was outraged.
This latest incident is a good ways down on the sliding scale/slippery slope from that, both in the degree of cruelty involved, the lowly position of the offending functionary, and the petty excuse for it all.
By 2010, we may fully expect a hard-of-hearing paraplegic Franciscan nun to be forced-fed a basketful of used deposit slips by a minimum-wage after-hours ATM guard because she looked at him funny as he sat in the window well reading his Urdu-language newspaper.
Do you have access to another version of the story? The linked story does not even talk about bending rules, just that the security guard escorted the chairs to the car to pick up the brothers.
I read that to mean that the mall has no problem with that situation, (they just want an authorized employee to escort the chairs outside the building), and this situation arose when one single idiot decided to impose an extreme reading of the rule on the situation.
Actually the same sort of thing happened to me a number of years ago.
My father wanted to do some shopping at the mall and although he didn’t need a wheelchair on a daily basis, he had very limited mobility and tired easily because he had Parkinson’s disease.
I pulled up to the entrance, helped him to a bench, parked the car and then went in and got a chair without any problem.
However, when we went to leave, a security guard standing by the door insisted that I had could not take the chair outside-not even to the bench which was in clear view.
Instead, I had to drop off the chair and walk Dad out.
Dad was a big guy and I’m about 110 pounds and somehow he fell which was not an unusual occurrence when he was exhausted.
If two nice male bystanders had not come to our assistance, I don’t think I would’ve been able to get him up.
The guard watched the whole incident from just inside the door.
And if they couldn’t fit the two necessary wheelchairs into the car for those two people, it’s not very plausible that they would spontaneously decide, “Hey, let’s go do something. This city’s just crawling with wheelchairs we can borrow.”
I say that because I’ve been wheelchair-ridden before for months at a time (amputated foot). Never once did I decide to get into a car and head out somewhere with the expectation that somebody would take care of my mobility problem for me and provide a wheelchair. It just seems odd that anybody would, that’s all.
This incident appears to have been resolved to everyone’s satisfaction. Westfield (the shopping centre owner) has apologised and donated $50,000 to the Muscular Dystrophy Association.
Thanks, Cunctator. Good to see there’s been benefit to a worthy cause from this stuation.
Most malls and shopping centers of any size - at least the ones where I am - have a couple of wheelchairs available for borrowing, so it’s reasonable to assume that the mall would have one. Expecting a large, more-or-less public establishment such as a mall to have wheelchairs for hire is hardly “expect[ing] someone to take care of [their] mobility problem.”
Unfortunately, those responsible have not been sacked.
Who? The staff on the day? If they were doing their jobs, in accordance with the policy of the mall, then Westfield can’t easily sack them – the employment courts (not sure how it works in Australia, but here it’s fairly solid) would chew them up for dinner.
If you mean those who wrote the policy in the first place – who knows? Less bonus this year?
My thoughts:
I knew two people growing up with MD. Some people get it early in life…maybe at birth. It starts out slowly, but gets progressively worse until you basically become a vegetable. Early on, they could walk with crutches and leg braces, but toward the end, they couldn’t even feed themselves.
In the two cases I knew of, one was an older lady, friend of my parents. She was probably in her late 60s. She had no problems until late in life. The other was a young man I went to school with…he was a few years older then me.
In both cases, neither one of them was going anywhere without their wheelchair. And they were not likely to be in a situation where they didn’t have a vehicle capable of carrying the wheelchair or loading them on with a lift.
Furthermore, the sister definitely could’ve left them by the door and gone to get the car.
Something’s missing from this story and it’s bound to come out.
Even if it happened as they reported, the sister is at least as much as fault as the idiot security guards for not trying to find another way around the rules.
Right. That’s why I wouldn’t be so quick to criticize the guard in question. He might have been afraid of losing his job if he didn’t enforce rules to the letter.
I’m not saying that he did the right thing, mind you. It’s just that I can see why he would take such an extreme interpretation of the rules.
I think the courts here would take much the same approach as in NZ.
But as one chapter ends another begins. This time it’s a staff member not being “flexible” enough in implementing the Qantas wheelchair policy. You’d think the bad publicity that Westfield got would have alerted others to update their guidelines.
Well, to be fair, airport procedure is all about demeaning, pointless, petty authority. It’s supposed to make us feel safe.
As long as the guard had been working for them for more than six months or if she had a fixed term contract and because Westfield has more than 100 employees, yes.
Outside that, it’s fire at will, baby. Say hi to Workchoices, Australia.
More generally, the problem with mall security guards is that the work self selects for petty tyrants. I’m not by any means saying they are all petty tyrants, but there are too many of them that are. If you like throwing your authority around, but are too dumb to get a job that requires responsibility and gives you authority, where do you end up?
Actually, I can see why the sister might not have brought along their own wheelchairs. I injured my knee last summer and, while I wasn’t issued a wheelchair, I was on crutches wasn’t supposed to put weight on my knee. A couple of times when I went on an outing because I was in danger of going stir-crazy, I called the place I was planning on going and asked if they had a wheelchair I could borrow. Once they did; once they didn’t (it was an outdoor arts festival). The time a wheelchair wasn’t available, I called a local pharmacy who lent me a wheelchair for the day. I also used the motorized carts supplied by the local supermarket to do my grocery shopping,
I assume the sister called the mall and asked if they had wheelchairs available for shoppers to use. I know I’ve seen wheelchairs and electric carts at the customer service desks of the malls I’ve gone to. Most places seem to be pretty accomodating when it comes to people who don’t get around easily. I assume this mall will be particularly so now.
CJ