British Airways and Disability Discrimination!!

Inactive

Doesn't work like that, you need to contact MSE to close a thread.;)

withabix

rose28454 wrote: »

this thread is now closed by me!

You will have to ignore the rest of us then, as the Mods will not close a thread which solely contains reasoned discussion from all of the posters other than the OP, who seems to object to the fact that nobody is agreeing with her opinion.

There may have been other passengers on the flight who's needs were greater. There may not have been. BUT your BIL does not have an automatic RIGHT to the bulkead seats.

Having looked at the BA 747 seat layout on this route, 'extra legroom' seats are on exit rows (disabled persons can't sit there) or are marked on SeatGuru as 'good for some' or 'be aware', which won't necessarily mean they've got extra legroom. It could be considered that being disabled down one side following a stroke means that it could be easier to get out of a seat if there is something in front of you to pull on, like another seat.

There has been NO discrimination here or by BA.

To have been discriminated against, your BIL would have had to have been given a seat which was WORSE than the MAJORITY of seats in the WT cabin. He wasn't. What you THINK he should have received is Positive Discrimination, which IS ILLEGAL.

IF your BIL wanted a seat with extra leg room, he should have booked and paid for one in a cabin which guarantees such seats.

By the way - an upgrade from WT to WT+ for £200 each one way is a BARGAIN!

On a transatlantic flight I've got booked for later this year, the difference between the two tickets is £1800.

hammy_the_hammer

i would have said that if they had written to BA and more importantly the travel insurance company about the increased risk your BiL being affected by DVT they probably wouldn't have been going on holiday

silvercar

You can't have it both ways.

How can you say that your BIL is at risk of DVT but you aren't prepared to pay £200 to (as you see it) reduce the risk?

nwt83

Rose, I am so sorry for your brother in law and that you have received so many ignorant and unhelpful replies!!!

Obviously the people replying to this have no concept of disability.
Is it not enough that this poor man has had a stroke???? Is he not entitled to a holiday?!?

Disabled people are discriminated in every area from (the vast majority) having less earning power to having to pay A LOT more for travel insurance.

We should have the same opportunites as everyone else, even if we don't have the "means" to pay for the extra help we need.

Public transport has to be accessible, IMHO so should aircraft. If they stopped being greedy and gave all seats a decent pitch, say 34 inches, then there wouldn't be an issue. SO if they are unwilling or unable to provide accessible seats, they should provide a free upgrade to as many of those who need it as possible.

Sod following policy or protocol, they should be more flexible!

As a disabled person MYSELF, a holiday often costs me £500+ more than everyone else. Is this fair????
It's not my fault I was born disabled.

Obviously i'm going to get slated for my reply, I can see it coming. But all I can say is it's quite mean to say that people shouldn't get preferential treatment for being disabled. Er yes we should, it's either that or we get excluded from society.

PS: not interested in ignorant replies from people who haven't got a clue.

dmg24

nwt83,

The OP's BIL was given a seat that was accessible to him. He did not need an upgrade for the airline to fulfil this requirement.

Can you explain why you should get preferential treatment? There is a great difference between that and getting reasonable adjustments.

As someone with a disability (albeit a hidden one), my attitude is to get on with things and make the best you can of a bad situation, and stop feeling sorry for yourself and thinking that the world owes you a favour!

nwt83

1) No it wasn't accessible to him because he needed help from the person who was acting as his carer.

2) I deserve preferential treatment because if I don't get it EG: extra legroom, I will end up in hospital or worse. But I don't believe that I should miss out.
I would be perfectly happy to sit in a premium seat with no entertainment or free booze etc. I just need the legroom but am not allowed to sit in the ones near the emergency exits.

3)I don't think I am owed anything and worked up until my disability became too bad to do so. It's just that if I don't get extra support, I literally can't leave the house. What sort of a life is that???

4) I do make the most of things. I have a degree and a teaching qualification even though I had to miss 3 years of school as a child and I CERTAINLY don't feel sorry for myself. But I do get angry when I am hindered because society stops me from doing things because of my disability. I think this is fair enough.

Sam_Bee

nwt83 wrote: »

Is he not entitled to a holiday?!?

No-ones 'entitled' to a holiday in Florida last time I checked.

But it keeps coming back to these 'premium' seats. I really hope it's clear that he can't get an Emergency Exit, and the only other 'premium' seats are Bulkhead (although that's arguable) which the airline HAS to prioritise to those with infants. There are no other 'premium' seats apart from those that are paid for, and that is the only guarantee you can have.

I'm really confused as to why, if 'I will end up in hospital or worse' if you don't have extra legroom seats, you aren't prepared to guarantee it by paying for it. Surely you would then be being negligent to yourself?

dmg24

nwt83 wrote: »

1) No it wasn't accessible to him because he needed help from the person who was acting as his carer.

2) I deserve preferential treatment because if I don't get it EG: extra legroom, I will end up in hospital or worse. But I don't believe that I should miss out.
I would be perfectly happy to sit in a premium seat with no entertainment or free booze etc. I just need the legroom but am not allowed to sit in the ones near the emergency exits.

3)I don't think I am owed anything and worked up until my disability became too bad to do so. It's just that if I don't get extra support, I literally can't leave the house. What sort of a life is that???

4) I do make the most of things. I have a degree and a teaching qualification even though I had to miss 3 years of school as a child and I CERTAINLY don't feel sorry for myself. But I do get angry when I am hindered because society stops me from doing things because of my disability. I think this is fair enough.

You are confusing what the OP said.

The person was able to sit in the original seat with their carer (and therefore BA had fulfilled their obligations). However, they would be more comfortable in a seat with extra legroom. People who are very tall or otherwise large would also benefit from having extra legroom, yet they are not given special treatment (and they do not choose to be that way, just as a disabled person does not choose to have their condition).

The DVT argument is not one that would hold any weight with the airline. I know someone who has to have clot busting injections before and after flying due to her high risk of DVT, but she knows that this does not entitle her to extra legroom. Indeed, as a previous poster has stated, if the risk of DVT is that high, a medical professional would not give consent for the person to fly.

What you are describing for your own situation is not preferential treatment, but a reasonable adjustment. No one is saying that reasonable adjustments should not be made.

Nobody is making light of people with disabilities. What people have said, is that beyond essential adjustments, people should not expect extras just by playing the disability card.

withabix

nwt83 wrote: »

1) No it wasn't accessible to him because he needed help from the person who was acting as his carer.

2) I deserve preferential treatment because if I don't get it EG: extra legroom, I will end up in hospital or worse. But I don't believe that I should miss out.
I would be perfectly happy to sit in a premium seat with no entertainment or free booze etc. I just need the legroom but am not allowed to sit in the ones near the emergency exits.

3)I don't think I am owed anything and worked up until my disability became too bad to do so. It's just that if I don't get extra support, I literally can't leave the house. What sort of a life is that???

4) I do make the most of things. I have a degree and a teaching qualification even though I had to miss 3 years of school as a child and I CERTAINLY don't feel sorry for myself. But I do get angry when I am hindered because society stops me from doing things because of my disability. I think this is fair enough.

So, you want to receive POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION, which is ILLEGAL under all Discrimination Acts?