KDHawaii777

Here is what Air Carrier Act says:


382.47 Accommodations for persons with hearing impairments.

(a) Each carrier providing scheduled air service, or charter service under section 401 of the Federal Aviation Act, and which makes available telephone reservation and information service available to the public shall make available a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) service to enable persons with hearing impairments to make reservations and obtain information. The TDD service shall be available during the same hours as the telephone service for the general public and the response time for answering calls shall be equivalent. Users of the TDD service shall not be subject to charges for a call that exceed those applicable to other users of the telephone information and reservation service.

(b) In aircraft in which safety briefings are presented to passengers on video screens, the carrier shall ensure that the video presentation is accessible to persons with hearing impairments.

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the carrier shall implement this requirement by using open captioning or an inset for a sign language interpreter as part of the video presentation.

(2) A carrier may use an equivalent non-video alternative to this requirement only if neither open captioning nor a sign language interpreter inset could be placed in the video presentation without so interfering with it as to render it ineffective or would be large enough to be readable.

(3) Carriers shall implement the requirements of this section by substituting captioned video materials for uncaptioned video materials as the uncaptioned materials are replaced in the normal course of the carrier’s operations.

The bottom line is that The 1986 Air Carrier Access Act guarantees the rights of persons with disabilities traveling by air. Why can't they provide movie with closed captioned or open captioned?

HigherFlyer

This means that if the FA stands in the aisle, and points to the exits, they have fulfilled their reqirement.

This still aplies only to the safety speech at the begining of the flight.

Again, this only aplies if the video is replacing the FA's speech. It does not include entertainment.

This could be argued as possibly including entertainment.

There is no "right to entertainment". This section of the law applies only to safety instructions on video. However, since they advertize the movies, they still should be required to acommodate you under the ADA rules and definitions regarding 'entertainment venues'.

TravelManKen

What the bleep are you talking about??!! How did you get "stay in the house and shut up" out of my relaying a comment from a disabled person that chairs a committee for disabled rights? While we're out here trying to make sure that all cross walks have sound indicators for the blind, sidewalks have cut-ins for those in wheelchairs and safety oriented warnings have visual aides for the deaf; you want to waste time getting DVD players to watch Blockbuster films on transcontinental flights. Where are your priorities? What I'm saying is that demanding DVD players on airlines is a ridiculous request, and it is to any reasonable person - disabled or not. Heck you can make the argument that any person with a "hearing impairment" is entitled to a personal DVD player. How would you tell someone that has trouble hearing the film that they are not "deaf enough" to qualify for an inseat DVD player. How is it fair that I have to watch some crappy movie + 2 hours of "NBC Inflight" while you're able to watch two movies of your choice on your DVD player.

DVD players are a luxury, not a safety, access or civil rights issue.

Wiggums

(a) They already do that.
(b) They already do that.
(b1) They already do that.
(b2) They already do that.
(c) They already do that.

What you are clearly missing is that it's MOVIES, not SAFETY VIDEOS.

Analise

Who's being silly? Please cite the governmental regulation which REQUIRES airlines to show entertainment movies. I'd love to see how that "you must show entertainment" law is worded by the government. Thanks.

JeremyZ

This cannot be put any clearer:

KDHawaii - airlines are not *required* to provide movies for anyone. They are not required to provide magazines, food, or drinks either.

DeafFlyer - people are not attacking you, but we are objecting to your inconsistent and confusing arguments. you're agreeing with the position that subtitles would be a "nice gesture," rather than a requirement, and are then immediately changing your view to the opposite position.


Next you guys will be insisting that the music in elevators demands subtitling since building owners are "required" to provide entertainment.

KDHawaii777

Excuse me, Are you saying that IFE is a ridiculous request? IFE are a luxury, not a safety, access or civil rights issue? What would happen if the airlines DECIDE to remove IFE, would the passenger complain? Yes, they would complain to the airlines and say "hey I wanna watch movie, I wanna magazines, I wanna music, the list goes on" The airlines are willing to provide for the hearing passengers. What happened to the deaf passengers? Hello?

whirledtraveler

I still want to know what they are going to do for the blind passengers. Doesn't it appall you that airlines don't provide a separate audio track with commentary on the positions of the actors and and a description of the action on the screen?

Well, doesn't it?

TravelManKen

There is no IFE on B737 Sacramento to Chicago (4 hours) routes on United, no IFE on American Airlines flights from Sacramento to Dallas (4 hours) on those MD-80's, none at all on coast-to-coast Southwest flights (unless you count the singing flight attendants).

You also run into the challenge of administering the program. Are DVD players only for the deaf? What about hearing impaired? Older persons with vision challenges preventing them from seeing the screens in the ceilings - the list is endless. It's always endless whenever you're talking about luxury items vs. items of necessity.

KDHawaii777

Deaf and hearing impaired are basically same thing. I am not talking about luxury. I am talking about the rights..

Analise

What rights? What the heck are you talking about? LOL We are still waiting for you to cite the federal legislation which REQUIRES airlines to show entertainment movies. You haven't done that yet. No rights have been broken if there is no federal law mandating the right of passengers to be entertained on an airplane.

Wiggums

You're talking about your rights?

Do you realize how stupid this is? The big TV screens in Times Square, it's my right to force them to caption it! When I walk into a TV store, I expect all the TV's on display to show captioning because it's my right!

You're one of the LESS than 0.1% of the general population. It is arrogant to expect 99.9% of the others to cater to you.

KDHawaii777

Laugh all you want...Let me tell you something. Federal Gov't requires ALL TV programs to be CAPTIONED by 2008 or 2009. It does NOT apply to airplane however it would be nice if they did....

Analise

Who's laughing? Maybe you. Glad you now admit that there is no fundamental right to be entertained while on an airplane and thus your "victim" mantra as it applies to airline entertainment has no legal foundation. It's just whining.

Since you do realize that there are no laws requiring IFE on board.....why did you say this?


There is no governmental "right" to IFE whether you are deaf or not. So there is no denial of equal rights because no right of IFE even exists.

KDHawaii777

That's you.