Public Accommodations — Structural Barriers to Accessibility

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning structural barriers to accessibility? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding structural barriers to accessibilitySee WAC 162-26-100WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – STRUCTURAL BARRIERS TO ACCESSIBILITY

WAC 162-26-100 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses structural barriers to accessibility as follows:

(1) Laws requiring accessibility. The commission enforces the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60 RCW, not other state or federal laws. The commission provides the following references as guidance to places of public accommodation. The principal laws requiring that places of public accommodation be made accessible include, but are not limited to:

(a) The Washington State Building Code.

(b) Chapter 219, Laws of 1971 ex. sess.

(c) Chapter 35, Laws of 1967.

(d) RCW 35.68.075.

(e) United States law; including The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, codified at 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Federal Fair Housing Act.

(2) Practices that are not unfair. It is not an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 to operate a place of public accommodation with structural barriers to accessibility of the person with a disability when the structural barriers:

(a) Were lawful when constructed; and

(b) Are presently lawful under the state building code and other law outside of the law against discrimination.

This exemption does not relieve the operator of a place of public accommodation of the duty to make reasonable accommodation to the needs of disabled persons as described in WAC 162-26-080.

(3) When required by law. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215:

(a) To deny service to any person because of a barrier to accessibility when accessibility is required by law;

(b) To build or remodel in a way that does not comply with requirements of law on accessibility;

(c) To operate a place of public accommodation that is out of compliance with a law requiring accessibility;

(d) To fail to maintain or fail to continue the accessibility of a place of public accommodation that was required by law to be accessible when it was built, remodeled, or rehabilitated.

(4) Nonstructural changes. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 for a person who is making nonstructural changes in a place of public accommodation to fail to eliminate barriers to same service when this can be done without substantially changing the scope or cost of the project or requiring structural changes that are not otherwise required by law. Specifically, it is an unfair practice:

(a) When installing a nonstructural fixture or component, to choose and install one that is not accessible to the person with a disability or that makes the place of public accommodation less accessible to the person with a disability.

(b) When replacing a nonstructural fixture or component, to replace it with one that is not accessible to the person with a disability or one that makes the place of public accommodation less accessible to the person with a disability.

(c) When relocating a nonstructural fixture or component, to relocate it to a place that is not accessible to the person with a disability, unless no suitable place is accessible.

(d) When modifying a nonstructural fixture or component, to do so in a way that does not eliminate barriers to the person with a disability, when possible.

WAC 162-26-100 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw

Public Accommodations — Behavior Causing Risk

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning behavior causing risk? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding behavior causing riskSee WAC 162-26-110WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – BEHAVIOR CAUSING RISK

WAC 162-26-110 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses behavior causing risk as follows:

(1) Proviso interpreted. This section interprets the following proviso of RCW 49.60.215:

“Provided, That behavior or actions constituting a risk to property or other persons can be grounds for refusal and shall not constitute an unfair practice.”

(2) General rule. It is not an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 to deny a person service in a place of public accommodation because that person’s behavior or actions constitute a risk to property or other persons.

(3) Individual judgment required. To come within this exception, the denial of service must be based on knowledge of the present behavior or actions of the individual who is not served. It is an unfair practice to exclude all persons who have a disability or who have a particular disability unless the operator of the place of public accommodation can show that all persons with the disability will present a risk to persons or property.

(4) Likelihood of injury. Risk to property or other persons must be immediate and likely, not remote or speculative.

(5) Degree of risk. Risk of injury to persons may be given more weight than risk of injury to property. Risk of severe injury may be given more weight than risk of slight injury.

(6) Risk to person with a disability. Risk to the person with a disability is not a reason to deny service. Law other than the law against discrimination governs liability for injury to customers with a disability. The law against discrimination affects tort liability only insofar as it includes persons with a disability within the public for which public accommodations must be made safe.

(7) Annoyance to staff or other customers. Annoyance on the part of staff or customers of the place of public accommodation at the abnormal appearance or behavior of a person with a disability is not a “risk to property or other persons” justifying nonservice.

(8) Least discriminatory solution required. It is an unfair practice to deny a person with a disability the enjoyment of an entire place of public accommodation because the person presents a risk of injury when using part of the place. When risk justifies not serving a person with a disability in the same way or same place as other customers, the person should be served through reasonable accommodation (WAC 162-26-060, 162-26-080), if possible.

WAC 162-26-110 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw

Preemployment Inquiry Guide — Purpose

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Preemployment Inquiry Guide, what is the purpose of the chapter? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the purpose of the chapter. See WAC 162-12-100WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PURPOSE OF CHAPTER

WAC 162-12-100 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses the purpose of the chapter as follows:

(1) These regulations carry out the law against discrimination as stated generally in RCW 49.60.010 and 49.60.030, and interpret RCW 49.60.180 and 49.60.200 which declare certain preemployment inquiries to be unfair practices.

(2) The commission generally follows chapter 49.60 RCW and federal court decisions that interpret comparable statutes and rules. The commission will not follow federal precedents when a different interpretation of state statutes and rules will better carry out the purposes of chapter 49.60 RCW.

(3) This regulation cannot cover every question that might arise in connection with inquiries prior to employment. The commission expects that in most cases these rules, either directly or by analogy, will guide those who are covered by the law.

(4) Definition: In this chapter, the following words are used in the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning.

“Protected status” is short for the phrase, “age, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, marital status, race, creed, color, national origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person,” and means the full phrase (see RCW 49.60.180).

WAC 162-12-100 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw

General Purpose & Definitions

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment Regulations, what are the rules concerning both the general purpose and definitions? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the general purpose and definitionsSee WAC 162-16-200WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

GENERAL PURPOSE & DEFINITIONS

WAC 162-16-200 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses general purpose and definitions  as follows:

The law against discrimination protects persons from discrimination in employment (RCW 49.60.180, 49.60.190, and 49.60.200). Persons are also protected from discrimination as provided in RCW 49.60.172 (unfair practices with respect to HIV infection), RCW 49.60.174 (actual or perceived HIV infection), and RCW 49.60.210 (unfair to discriminate against person opposing unfair practice).

(1) The commission‘s first objective in writing the rules in this chapter and in making future decisions on questions not addressed in this chapter is to eliminate and prevent discrimination. This is the overall purpose of the law against discrimination.

(2) Other objectives in writing these rules are:

(a) To be consistent with interpretations of federal antidiscrimination law and the antidiscrimination laws of other states, where these are comparable to Washington law, and where the commission does not find that a different rule would better serve the state of Washington.

(b) To avoid the uncritical adoption of definitions from areas of law other than antidiscrimination law. It is appropriate to define employment differently in different areas of the law to carry out the separate purpose of each area of law.

(c) To give effect to the purposes of the exemption of employers of less than eight from public enforcement of the law against discrimination, as identified in RCW 49.60.040.

(d) The public and commission staff need standards that are certain and that are easy to understand and apply. Therefore we must sometimes simply draw a line, although reasonable persons could differ as to where the line should be drawn.

(3) The state law against discrimination covers employers with eight or more employees. Persons should also educate themselves on relevant local or federal antidiscrimination laws.

(4) Definition:
In this chapter, the following words are used in the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning.
“Protected status” is short for the phrase, “age, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, marital status, race, creed, color, national origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person,” and means the full phrase (see RCW 49.60.180).

WAC 162-16-200 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw