Good morning,
You have brought up some interesting questions.
After doing a little research although wheelchair manuals in general do not use the term death they dedicate a very large portion of their manuals to the safety risks. Although they don't use the word death they spend plenty of time explaining the risks to the user and to others. The warnings of some of the manuals are so extensive that they take up almost a third of the document. They list a wide range of dangers from tipping over, losing traction and hitting others to the possibilities of electrical failures and fires. I also turned up recalls while I was looking for a manuals.
It seems that I am unable to provide you links for some of these wheelchair manuals, but they can be found by doing a Google search for wheelchair operating manuals. There is a good link there that lists the manuals for hundreds of different wheelchairs both power and manual.
The link is titled Mobility Scooters Manuals, Wheelchair and Powerchair User Guides .
*
Based on the fact that many Disney rides and attractions list the risks of injury and death, I also believe there is a disclaimer on the tickets, I don't think their attorneys would be willing to take that route.
Although they only give tours when the parks are closed and after thorough training it still would not remove them from liability, if there would be any injuries, should one of their guests fall or run into another person. As far as your employees would assume that they would cease use of the Segways.
As to your question on buses I was very surprised to find that there is actually policy on the subject. I was even more surprised to see that this guidance was released in 2005. Again I cannot provide a link so I apologize for posting the policy in its entirety.
Federal Transit Administration (Printable) - ADA Information Section
Use of "Segways" on Transportation Vehicles
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISABILITY LAW GUIDANCE
USE OF "SEGWAYs" ON TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES
This guidance document concerns the question of whether transportation entities (e.g., transit
authorities, Amtrak) should permit the "Segway" personal transportation device to be used on
transportation vehicles when used as a mobility device by people with disabilities.
The Segway is a two-wheeled, gyroscopically stabilized, battery-powered personal transportation
device. The Segway is not designed primarily for use by individuals with disabilities, nor is it used
primarily by such individuals. However, some individuals with disabilities may use a Segway as a
personal mobility aid, in lieu of more traditional devices like a wheelchair or
scooter.
The Department's ADA rule (49 CFR Part 37, §37.3) defines a "wheelchair" as "a mobility aid belonging
to any class of three or four-wheeled vehicles, designed for and used by individuals with mobility
impairments..." (emphasis added). By this definition, a Segway is not a wheelchair. However, a
Segway, when used by a person with a disability as a mobility device, is part of the broad class of
mobility aids that Part 37 intends will be accommodated (see for instance §§37.5 and 37.165). In this
way, a Segway occupies a legal position analogous to canes, walkers, etc.
Because a Segway is not a wheelchair, the ADA regulation's provisions for lift and securement use
specific to wheelchairs (§37.165(a) - (e)) do not apply to Segways and their users. However, §37.165
(g) requires transit providers to "permit individuals with disabilities who do not use wheelchairs" to use a
vehicle's lift or ramp to enter the vehicle. Individuals who do not use wheelchairs commonly use the lift
together with their non-wheelchair mobility devices, such as canes, crutches or walkers. Under this
provision, an individual with a disability who uses a Segway as a mobility device must be permitted to
use the lift.
This is not to say that transportation providers are required to allow all Segway users to bring their
devices on board a bus or train. Transportation providers may establish their own general policies
regarding Segways and other devices, just as they do with respect to pets or bicycles. However, when a
device is being used as a mobility device by a person with a mobility-related disability, then the
transportation provider must permit the person and his or her device onto the vehicle.
This is analogous to the situation in which a transportation provider that has a general policy that does not permit pets to enter, but must permit a person with a disability to bring a service animal into a vehicle.
Also, a transportation provider is not required to permit anyone -- including a person with a disability -- to
bring a device onto a vehicle that is too big or that is determined to pose a direct threat to the safety of
others. With respect to size, a non-wheelchair mobility device that exceeds the size and weight
standards for a "common wheelchair" (i.e., 30 x 48 inches, measured two inches above the ground, and
not exceeding 600 pounds, including the user) can reasonably be considered too large. The direct
threat standard is intentionally stringent (i.e., requiring a determination that there is a significant risk to
the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by modification of policies, procedures, practices,
or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services). A transportation provider seeking to exclude a mobility
device on direct threat grounds should first consult with the appropriate DOT operating administration for
guidance.
We note that this analysis would apply to other situations. For example, a Federal Highway
Administration-assisted recreational trail that normally cannot permit use by motorized vehicles should
accommodate Segways when used as a mobility device by someone with a mobility-related disability.
This guidance has been approved through the Department of Transportation's Disability Law
Coordinating Council as representing the official views of the Department on this matter.
September 1, 2005
Last Modified: Thursday, September 01, 2005
Many may wonder why this guidance is provided by the DOT and not the Department of Justice.
The reason is that the definition of the common wheelchair was created originally for the sole purpose of providing dimensions etc. so that wheelchair users could be accommodated by what would become a standard lift design.
As I said I was surprised to see that there was already policy on this. So the answer would be yes public transportation would have to be included and that will include Disney's buses whether the buses are leased or owned by Disney.
This is become for more interesting for me than I ever would've imagined. These are the most sweeping changes since the original signing of the ADA. Over the years the courts have picked apart many of the rights that were initially awarded those with disabilities.
A couple of quick things. If you are a person that has been using a companion animal for emotional purposes you should also read these regulations carefully as they have removed those protections.
Finally, and sadly I see at times that the conversation turns from constructive to destructive. I saw this for many years while I practiced law. I have many clients who are persons with disabilities and some of them would find the term "confined to a wheelchair" offensive while for others it really didn't make a difference. It's very difficult to read into what a person meant when all the conversations are in printed word. When you can't see the people you're talking to is impossible to judge the inflection in her voice to look at her eyes and all the other factors that make face-to-face communication what it is.
Again I apologize for being redundant but 180 days after these regulations are posted they will become law. What's done is done and discussion on this NPRM ended almost 2 years ago. After Atty. Gen. Holder put his signature to the documents they became law of the land.
What the end result will be for Disney is still yet to be seen but these new regulations have put the heavy burden of proof squarely on the places of public accommodation. I will say this though, lengthy discussions on how they could avoid the law never looks good when others come lurking. I will assume that all sides, Disney, the Segway users, and the DOJ look at each other's sites from time to time.
While we are on the subject here are four new proposed changes up for public comment. You can give your opinion at the DOJ's website.
Thank you again for your time,
Harold
)
