It is interesting to note that many disabled persons, instead ofslinking away and being embarrassed by their conditions, areasserting their rights. They already educate themselves with thebasics of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, alaw which protects them against discrimination and rules thatestablishments and such give proper accommodations for them.
Adopted to remove the barriers that prevented the society frombenefiting from the participation and contributions ofindividuals with disabilities, the ADA took effect in July 26,1990. Its Title I prohibits private employers, state and localgovernments, employment agencies and labor unions fromdiscriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities –whether in job application, procedures, hiring, firing,advancement, compensation, job training and other terms,conditions and privileges of employment. It also has thequalifications of a person with disability. Four other titles ofADA includes other aspects where the issue of disability is verymuch considered: public services and public transportation,public accommodations, telecommunications and miscellaneous.
Many states have also adopted and enforce versions of thefederal ADA. Now, on the Supreme Court rulings posted by PeggyMcGuiness at Opinio Juris, referred to by Walter Olson on March2, 2005 at the site,http://www.overlawyered.com/archives/cat_disabled_rights.htmlseveral important and interesting issues about the ADA wereraised.
An argument ensued at the Supreme Court when the Department ofJustice (DOJ) sided with a group of disabled cruise passengerswho sued Norwegian Cruise Lines (NCL) for failing to provide thekinds of accommodations required on public transportation underthe Americans with Disabilities Act. The defendant, NCL arguesthat they should be exempt from ADA regulation in the same waythat they are exempt from federal labor laws because their shipsfly under the Bahamian flag. The DOJ and the plaintiffs arguethat the ADA can be applied to foreign flagged vessels operatingin US waters precisely because they come in and out of USjurisdiction and operate as a public accommodation.
Now, this is really quite an ruling since it essentially goesbeyond the international law, which maintain that ships aregenerally only subject to the jurisdiction of the state underwhose flag they sail. Infact, cruiselines choose to registerunder foreign flags precisely to avoid certain regulatoryrestrictions and costs (i.e., taxation, labor and employmentlaws).
The DOJ ruling favoring the disabled has become a broadapplication of the ADA to foreign-flagged vessels. This mighteven be conceivably applied not only to cruise ships, but alsoto every merchant marine vessel that ever enters US waters. Butcruiselines are not interested in complying with the nation’sstringent ADA since compliance in those circumstances would beextraordinarily expensive and a burden on trade.
I think there’s nothing wrong with the ruling, though. It’s justthat, public services, transportation and all other busnessestablishments must not just think about the expenses that gowith compliance on several laws. They must simply learn torespect the rights of disabled citizens.
About the author:For additional Information about the articles you may visithttp://www.wheelchairspower.com
No comments:
Post a Comment