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 — Use of Trained Dog Guide or Service Animal

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning use of a trained dog guide or service animal? 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 use of a trained dog guide or service animalSee WAC 162-26-130WA 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 – USE OF TRAINED DOG GUIDE OR SERVICE ANIMAL

WAC 162-26-130 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses use of a trained dog guide or service animal as follows:

(1) Coverage of statute. RCW 49.60.215 requires fair service in a place of public accommodation “regardless of . . . the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person . . .” as well as because of disability itself.

(2) Same rules apply. All of the rules of this chapter with respect to disability itself apply equally to service of a person with a disability who is using a trained dog guide or service animal. See particularly WAC 162-26-060 and 162-26-070.

WAC 162-26-130 (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 — Unfair to Request or Require Waiver of Rights

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning requesting or requiring waiver of rights? 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 requesting or requiring waiver of rightsSee WAC 162-26-140WA 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 – UNFAIR TO REQUEST OR REQUIRE WAIVER OF RIGHTS

WAC 162-26-140 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses requesting or requiring waiver of rights as follows:

This section is intended to prohibit waivers on the basis of disability, but is not intended to preclude waivers required on a nondiscriminatory basis.

(1) It is an unfair practice for any person to request or require another person to waive rights or hold anyone harmless as a condition of the use or enjoyment of a place of public accommodation by a disabled person.

(2) It is an unfair practice to request or require another person to waive rights or hold anyone harmless as a condition of the use or enjoyment of a place of public accommodation by a disabled person using a dog guide or service animal.

WAC 162-26-140 (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

Public Accommodation — Reasonable Accommodation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning reasonable accommodation? 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 reasonable accommodationSee WAC 162-26-080WA 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 – REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

WAC 162-26-080 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses reasonable accommodation as follows:

(1) Unfair practice to not accommodate. It is an unfair practice for a person in the operation of a place of public accommodation to fail or refuse to make reasonable accommodation to the known physical, sensory, or mental limitations of a person with a disability or to the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person, when same service would prevent the person from fully enjoying the place of public accommodation.

(2) Determining reasonableness. Whether a possible accommodation is reasonable or not depends on the cost of making the accommodation, the size of the place of public accommodation, the availability of staff to make the accommodation, the importance of the service to the person with a disability, and other factors bearing on reasonableness in the particular situation.

(3) Carrying not favored. Carrying a mobility-impaired person is not required by law and is not an acceptable accommodation, except in rare circumstances. Carrying should be done only when there is no other way for the mobility-impaired person to use the facility and when it is agreeable to the person with a disability.

(4) “Arranged service.” The concept of “arranged service,” as formerly defined in commission rules, is incorporated fully within the scope of reasonable accommodation.

WAC 162-26-080 (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 — General Rules

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the general rules? 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 general rulesSee WAC 162-26-070WA 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 – GENERAL RULES

WAC 162-26-070 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses general rules as follows:

These rules apply except where exempted by RCW 49.60.215 for structural changes or behavior causing risk, or excepted by ruling of the commissioners under WAC 162-06-030. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 for any person in the operation of a place of public accommodation, because of disability or use of a trained dog guide or service animal:

(1) To refuse to serve a person;

(2) To charge for reasonably accommodating the special needs of a disabled person;

(3) To require a disabled person accompanied by a trained dog guide or service animal in any of the places listed in RCW 70.84.010(3) to pay an extra charge for the trained dog guide or service animal;

(4) To treat a disabled person as not welcome, accepted, desired, or solicited the same as a nondisabled person;

(5) To segregate or restrict a person or deny a person the use of facilities or services in connection with the place of public accommodation where same service is possible without regard to the disability; or

(6) To fail to reasonably accommodate the known physical, sensory, or mental limitations of a disabled person, when same service would prevent the person from fully enjoying the place of public accommodation, as provided in WAC 162-26-080.

WAC 162-26-070 (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