Comments On The Draft Of The Passenger Vessel Accessibility Guidelines
Stephen M. Spinetto
Chair, Passenger Vessel Access Advisory Committee (PVAAC) 1998-2000
I have reviewed the draft of the Access Board’s Passenger Vessel Accessibility Guidelines. Although I am happy that the regulation process seems to be moving forward at long last, I have concerns over the proposed draft regulations. I do not have extensive comments but I do have concerns that I believe are extremely important.
First and foremost, I am extremely disappointed that the Board has not taken the Passenger Vessel Accessibility Advisory Committee (PVAAC) recommendations concerning Chapter 10, Employee Areas. The Access Board’s Draft Regulations have addressed only the passenger areas of vessels. Although there was some divergence of views within the Passenger Vessel Access Advisory Committee as to whether we had been charged with the responsibility towards the employee areas of passenger vessels, the majority of the Committee clearly felt that we did have that responsibility: our charge was to draft recommendations for accessibility on passenger vessels, not accessibility for passengers on vessels. The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) clearly addresses issues of employment; by not accepting the employee provisions of the recommendations, the Board is ignoring Title I of the ADA. As we celebrate the 15th anniversary of the signing of the ADA this week, we should reflect on the fact that persons with disabilities, even after 15 years still have by far the highest unemployment rate of any group.
During the many long discussions the Advisory Committee had concerning employee areas, maritime representatives pointed out various safety regulations that require employees on passenger vessels to be “able bodied seamen” which would therefore automatically exclude the employment of disabled persons aboard passenger vessels (As written, this requirement would also exclude women, although the industry does not choose to interpret it in this way.) This “requirement”, coupled with the fact that employee areas are not addressed in the regulations is a not very subtle way of saying: no disabled need apply. Having observed the safety training conducted at Piney Point Maryland and observed operations aboard ship, I know that many disabled persons could perform those duties. Every individual should be given the opportunity to show that he or she can perform the safety functions required aboard ship. If an applicant passes the training then, he or she should be eligible for employment aboard passenger vessels.
As an amputee, I believe I could successfully complete the required training to be an employee aboard a passenger vessel. I have previously served as a crewman aboard offshore sailing vessels from small craft to tall ships with duties ranging from working aloft, to bridge officer. As a disabled person, I do not think that I am particularly exceptional and am sure there are many others who could do the same.
The recommendations of the Committee do not require the employment of disabled persons on passenger vessels; accessibility to the technical spaces on vessels was not included in the PVAAC recommendations. The Committee’s recommendations do, however, set a minimum standard of accessibility for anyone who is hired. I believe the PVAAC recommendations were reasonable and would not be an undue burden on the cruise industry. In fact I strongly believe that it is clearly in the best interest of the cruise industry to include these provisions, as it is only a matter of time before the issue of employment aboard vessels will be confronted.
In general the draft regulations seem to have reverted back to treating passenger vessels as buildings. The Advisory Committee spent an enormous amount of time working through that deferential it does not appear that the draft regulations has taken our work to account. The proposed regulations particularly seem to fall short in these differences in the areas of watertight doors and elevator standards. It is ironic that the draft regulations seem to fall back to the standards for landside buildings, could you imagine a case of access regulations on any buildings having no requirements for employee access.
I urge the Board to include the PVAAC’s recommendations for employee areas of passenger vessels in their final regulations. I applaud the Board’s efforts to put these Access regulations in place and look forward to their establishment at the earliest possible time.