What I was getting at was the fact that I’m NOT an airline engineer, so I don’t know if such radical steps are needed. I doubt it, though. A redesign of the aisle chair, to make it independently mobile, could possibly solve the issue. And I HAVE brought this up to the FAA. But I am but one voice. One voice carries little weight, little power. I am bringing it up here, for one because this is a discussion board, and two so that many more ppl are made aware of this situation.
I was unfamiliar with what an aisle chair looks like, so I looked one up. Here’s what it looks like. Here are more examples.
It seems like the main issues with making it self-propelled is that the 15 inch aisle width doesn’t allow for large circumference wheels and the arm/elbow movements required to propel a wheelchair. If you look at the pictures, because of the narrow aisle, the wheels are directly below the body of the chair, not off to the side. In terms of motorization, due to FAA regulations, wheelchair batteries can’t be used.
It turns out that their are a number of manufacturers of aisle wheelchairs, and many of them are convertible. I’d think if it was possible to design a self-propelled chair that would fit within the constraints of a 15 inch aisle, a manufacturer would have developed one.
I’d imagine a resolution to the problem would require a wheelchair that used some other means of self-locomotion, or wider aisles.
I think the reason for all the seat belts and belting the passenger in so much is because the 15 inch width prevents the existence of arm-rests, so the side of the chair is completely open, and if someone fell out the airline would be negligent.
I understand the OP’s frustration, and I have no answers, but it does seem like a solution would require a significant re-design of the aisle chair and/or making the aisles significantly wider.
So if I’m to understand how many of you feel, you think that the upholding and carrying out of a person’s right as an autonomous human being completely depends on the “financial sense and feasibility” of making those rights into actual laws?
Apparently, not enough people who actually need the aisle wheelchair feel as you do. It may be that many users of the aisle-wheelchair actually prefer having someone push them, or basically don’t mind either way. As you state, a great many people do not need the bathroom at all, whether because they happen to not need the bathroom on a particular trip or because they are catherized.
Reasonable Accomodation is not a set of marching orders, it is a dialogue or dialectic process. You can’t just say I have a problem - SOLVE IT NOW. They actually don’t need to solve your problem, if it is a hardship to them. If the airline shows it is a hardship, then you have to show it’s not a hardship. That’s the “dialogue” that takes place in figuring out a reasonable accomodation.
The engineering and financial contraints of the airline industry are such that I think it is the least likely place in which a major change in accomodations will take place. Almost any change is a hardship if it must be done to every plans but only affects a tiny proportion of customers.
For two minutes of your life, you have to be pushed by someone else. I get that you don’t like it. You prefer something else. I apologize but I don’t find it a tremendous injustice. You feel strongly, but seemingly few other people in your exact situation do.
Just have to jump in here to say ‘yes’.
We have laws, and those laws say, that financial burden and feasibility are factors to be considered.
Can you give me an example? One that relates to an equality law? And “considered” is not the same as “factored above all else”
Yes. Not to sound crass, we’re an empathetic lot here.
Should all movie theatres be forced to provide some sort of closed-captioned device for deaf people? Should all crosswalks have auditory devices installed for the blind?
There comes a point where reasonable accommodations is not pragmatic.
But the lack of those things doesn’t deprive someone of their dignity and autonomy. HUGE difference.
You don’t know me from Adam. I assure you that I am not ignorant of your situation, nor of the plight of the disabled as a whole. You, on the other hand, come across as believing that you should not have to suffer any inconvenience due to your disability. You say you don’t understand the engineering challenges, but you want an entire industry to ‘do something’. I tried to point out a couple of issues that illustrate why not everyone can be completely accommodated, but you came out with ‘You don’t understand! You’re ignorant! They should accommodate me!’ I understand that you’re pissed off. But an airplane isn’t a but or a movie theatre. There are limitations.
The airline industry lost $51 billion from 2001 to 2009. IATA projects profits in 2011 to be just 1.5% And you’re asking for them to remove 20% of their seats. The only reasonable accommodation is the aisle chair. (Incidentally, every one I’ve seen [.) As Zsofia notes, the problem is not with the airlines. It’s that you are embarrassed by your disability and the need to rely on others.
No. Your rights are not being violated. Your body limits what you can do. Nobody is completely autonomous, and we all have to depend on others to a greater or lesser degree.
http://sportys.com/pilotshop/product/13089](https://enablemob.wustl.edu/ayw/Travel/Airline/boarding.htm"does have a back[/url)
http://sportys.com/pilotshop/product/13087
A lot of them do. They also have those bumps that identify the curb. Those accomodations seem to be becoming more popular, but I don’t know much about the applicable laws. I have to say I’m a little surprised at the reception jamiemcgarry is getting here. It’s not hard to understand why a wheelchair user might find it embarrassing or annoying to be strapped into a chair and pushed to the bathroom by a flight attedant. Saying it’s “subhuman” is over the top and I can see his tone (?) is not winning him any admirers, but I can see this as something that would be pretty aggravating. I don’t know how feasible the improvements are but I don’t know that they’re impossible.
I think people were making assumptions because you were fairly vague about how airlines and aircraft manufacturers were supposed to fix this problem.
I’m still not really understanding how making the aisle chair self-propelled really helps anything. One still won’t be able to store the chair near someone who needs it – can’t very well just stow the chair in the aisle, of course. Making the chair self-propelled doesn’t address the fact that the aisles are quite small and difficult for most people to navigate without some difficulty. And I’m a little unclear of how one can make the chair self-propelled with such a small aisle – it isn’t like there’s enough room for someone to use their hands to push the wheels along like a regular wheelchair, and making them motorized presents a lot of obstacles, too. You don’t want to have a motorized wheelchair bumping into other passengers, and even having a large battery in an aircraft cabin isn’t exactly the safest thing if the plane crashes and there is a fire…
The best think that I can think of is that airlines should prioritize seating disabled passengers near the restrooms so that the distance that has to be traveled is minimized. Other than that, substantial redesigns to aircraft, as other people have stated, is just a non-starter of an idea.
Sorry this is such a frustrating experience for you. It seems like some (but not all) of the problems could be addressed, frankly, if airlines were more customer-service oriented. As it is, airlines just do a lousy job of relating to the needs and interests of their customers, what from tacking on extra fees on everything to having a lot of surly people working for them.
I like to think of it this way…
If the cost to solve the problem was one dollar, it would be a no-brainer to go ahead and solve the problem.
If the cost to solve the problem was 100 trillion dollars, it would be a no-brainer to say the money should be spent in alternate ways.
Even when we talk about preserving and extending life, we talk about the cost, so the discussion is not exclusive to this topic.
The truth is somewhere between the two, and financial considerations play into it.
Air Carrier Access Act
Under existing Air Carrier Access Act interpretation and practice, carriers are not required to make modifications that would constitute an undue burden or fundamentally alter the nature of the carriers’ service. As a matter of disability law, undue burden implies that there may necessarily be some burden (a “due burden”) in accommodating someone’s disability. Generally, an action is deemed to be an undue burden if it would require significant difficulty or expense on the part of the covered entity when considered in light of factors such as the overall size of the business, the financial resources of the business, the type of operation, and the nature and cost of the accommodation. There is no hard and fast rule about what is or is not an “undue burden.”
(emphasis added) see page 34 of 136, of PDF available at:
http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/rules/Part%20382-2008.pdf
Published by the Aviation Consumer Protection and Enforcement agency, interpreting 14 CFR Part 382, a Federal regulation.
For another example,
Reasonable Accomodations and Undue Hardship under the Americans with Disabilities Act in employment
No, I am a full-grown adult who shouldn’t be forced to be treated like an invalid simply in order to use facilities on an airplane. I understand the difficulties that this problem presents but you are NOT seeing this from a “what if it was me” perspective. My rights ARE being violated. If you think I am embarrassed by my disability then you would never expect me to get myself down onto the aisle floor and slide myself (butt-first) down the length of the plane, stopping every few feet to ask an overweight passenger to move their leg(s), so I could get myself to the toilet. But I’ve done that. Numerous times. Such a ridiculous event is preferably (imo) to the “aisle chair” torture. My body limits what I can do, right. But taking myself to and from the bathroom on a plan is NOT one of them. I just shouldn’t be forced to undergo such humiliating steps to exercise this right.
Yeah, pretty much. IANAL, but I’m pretty sure that financial sense and feasibility is a common factor in determining issues such as this.
Then don’t fly. Sorry.
But you are and invalid. Therefore you must depend on people helping you.
Thanks. I was picturing a rickety wooden stool with some seatbelts and velcro attached.
Or maybe there isn’t much of a market to create and design something that, as the OP points out, is very seldom used. I’ve heard of niche markets, but still.
Just a FYI for everybody, the ADA does not cover airlines - they are covered under the aforementioned Air Carrier Access Act.