Wheelchair user takes precedence over a mother and two babies in a double-buggy?

Chalky

'Wheelchair v buggy': Man wins Supreme Court case - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38663322

The court said "The company should consider some further step to pressurise the non-wheelchair user to vacate the space, depending on the circumstances, it said."

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

As a bus driver said to me, no way is he going to try to eject a mother and babies from him bus - his family would disown him!

PolarityMan

What a muppet.

guitarfishbay

The carbon footprint of those babies is going to melt the polar ice caps.  So if they just wait a few decades it won't be freezing outside

quarky

I think the key word is "reasonable". If there is a reasonable opportunity for anyone to move out of that space, they should move. If not, well, they need to wait for the next bus I guess.

sweepy

Iirc, the Mother was quite abusive at the time, as a parent to twins I know the hassle that a double buggy entails and also having a wife who is sometimes confined to a wheelchair, no one is the winner here unfortunately.maybe Buses should have a larger open area at the front with hang straps used as necessary 

stickyfiddle

I sympathise with the situation, and I'm all for equality, but it surely goes beyond pushchairs and towards every full bus in the country? My old commuter bus was often so full of standing people at 8am and 6pm that it couldn't stop and pick me up. Annoying, but not the end of the world. What if I'd been in a wheelchair? Would it be right to have the driver legally obliged to stop and eject 4 people from the bus every day so one wheelchair user isn't inconvenienced? 

He seems to have missed the point that it goes the other way too - sometimes someone else will get fucked over because he's already in that spot. 

UnclePsychosis

This is a tricky one. I'm not so sure of the specifics of the case but I've seen in the past parents refuse to move to allow a wheelchair on in situations where they absolutely should have moved. A lot of the time its sheer laziness on behalf of the parent: when the child is big enough to walk and is wide awake then there's no reason not to take them out the buggy and fold it up so someone else can get on.

As a parent I get a bit annoyed at people who insist on taking buggies absolutely everywhere. Its rush hour and you're on the tube or bus ffs, do you really have to use the buggy? Personally I'm a big fan of wraps and slings: when its busy its so, so much easier to get around with a child strapped to you than by pushing an unwieldy buggy around.

As to the specifics of the case, it really depends on just how reasonable everyone involved was being. Hard to tell without actually being there.

octatonic

Clearly the disabled guy is in the right and the best decision was made.

I'm not currently disabled but there is a chance I could end up disabled.
I'll never be a mother with two children.
Therefore, correct.

crunchman

It's not a simple one, but there are some "disabled" people who want more than "equality".

I was in Argos a few months back when some woman in a mobility scooter who very loudly claimed to be disabled made a massive fuss about not being dealt with instantly by the staff, when everyone else had been queueing for 15 minutes because there weren't enough staff on.  She expected to be able to just jump to the front of the queue.  Not all are like that, but this does smack of that to some extent.

If the space is used then wait for the next bus.  Another mother with a double buggy would have had to.

A more legitimate argument is that more folding seats are needed so that there is flexibility for fitting more wheelchairs or buggies in as required, or that a more frequent bus service is required to cope with demand.

Arguing that they can kick a passenger who is already on the bus and paid for their ticket off the bus is ridiculous.  They would just get sued the other way.

Ultimately, the moral of this story is that if you actually want to get somewhere in a timely fashion, why on earth would you take a bus anyway?

earwighoney

I've seen lots of people with buggies and they refuse to move them, just leave them in the middle of the aisle.  It's not just wheelchair users they can be really inconsiderate towards but other passengers and also others with buggies.

One particular occasion, the driver asked a woman to fold her buggy for a woman in a wheel chair and the woman refused, and another woman on the bus launched into a racist tirade against the bus driver.  The child wasn't even a small one, but large enough to sit on a bus seat as well.  

Everyone has a right to travel.  Someone should not be refused travel when a parent can't be bothered to fold their buggy (if possible) or even move their buggy in a position to allow others to use the bay.  

sweepy

crunchman said:

It's not a simple one, but there are some "disabled" people who want more than "equality".

I was in Argos a few months back when some woman in a mobility scooter who very loudly claimed to be disabled made a massive fuss about not being dealt with instantly by the staff, when everyone else had been queueing for 15 minutes because there weren't enough staff on.  She expected to be able to just jump to the front of the queue.  Not all are like that, but this does smack of that to some extent.

If the space is used then wait for the next bus.  Another mother with a double buggy would have had to.

A more legitimate argument is that more folding seats are needed so that there is flexibility for fitting more wheelchairs or buggies in as required, or that a more frequent bus service is required to cope with demand.

Arguing that they can kick a passenger who is already on the bus and paid for their ticket off the bus is ridiculous.  They would just get sued the other way.

Ultimately, the moral of this story is that if you actually want to get somewhere in a timely fashion, why on earth would you take a bus anyway?

Because not everyone can afford a car or Taxi 

earwighoney

Chalky said:

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

The case in question only involved one baby not a buggy for two babies. 

fretmeister

crunchman said:

It's not a simple one, but there are some "disabled" people who want more than "equality".

I was in Argos a few months back when some woman in a mobility scooter who very loudly claimed to be disabled made a massive fuss about not being dealt with instantly by the staff, when everyone else had been queueing for 15 minutes because there weren't enough staff on.  She expected to be able to just jump to the front of the queue.  Not all are like that, but this does smack of that to some extent.

If the space is used then wait for the next bus.  Another mother with a double buggy would have had to.

A more legitimate argument is that more folding seats are needed so that there is flexibility for fitting more wheelchairs or buggies in as required, or that a more frequent bus service is required to cope with demand.

Arguing that they can kick a passenger who is already on the bus and paid for their ticket off the bus is ridiculous.  They would just get sued the other way.

Ultimately, the moral of this story is that if you actually want to get somewhere in a timely fashion, why on earth would you take a bus anyway?

Probably got banned from driving.

Chalky

earwighoney said:

Chalky said:

This is daft. Firstly, mothers with babies in double-buggies use the same space on the bus. The idea that an adult wheelchair user on a freezing windswept night can demand that a young mother with two babies can be ejected from a bus is not the right answer. Secondly, there is nothing more the bus driver can do other than ask the mother and babies to get off the bus - the bus driver has no power beyond that.

The case in question only involved one baby not a buggy for two babies. 

Yes, but the ruling applies to all - the point of the double-buggy example is that there is not always a simple choice of folding the buggy to make space.

Gagaryn

The problem could have been easily resolved with a tow bar.

fretmeister

The Judgment also says it must be dealt with on a case by case basis. That would suggest modifying the approach to fit each set of moving goalposts, err, possible examples.

fretmeister

Here is the full judgment

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2017/4.html

Always better to get the proper one rather than a journo deadline panic written pile of arse.

grungebob

its tricky but what is reasonably practicable in this situation?

You could argue that if the child is old enough to walk unaided then you should fold up the buggy and sit the child on your lap or seat next to you to allow a wheelchair user the space. however you could also argue that this shouldn't be allowed either as dont they request all school buses to be fitted with seat belts for young children?

 what would be more preferable a disabled person to wait 20 mins for the next bus or a parent and young infant?  

Grunfeld

fretmeister said:

Here is the full judgment

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2017/4.html

Always better to get the proper one rather than a journo deadline panic written pile of arse.

Indeed.  I was quietly impressed the judgement recommended that the existing legislation of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, and the accessibility legislation Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/1970), covering the bus company's policy in relation to the use of the space provided for wheelchair users on its buses be amended to incorporate Rule 1 "Don't be a dick" and furthermore that passengers be legally required to adhere to Rule 2 "Don't be nasty."

PolarityMan

fretmeister said:

The Judgment also says it must be dealt with on a case by case basis. That would suggest modifying the approach to fit each set of moving goalposts, err, possible examples.

Well thats fucking stupid as well. Im sure the supreme mega super court of justice has better things to be doing. This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

Sporky

PolarityMan said:

This should clearly be left to common sense and not dragged through the courts.

We have courts because we have common sense - which is essentially a heady mix of hindsight, ignorance of statistics and wishful thinking.