Decision No. 400-AT-A-1998
August 6, 1998
IN THE MATTER OF Decision No. 37-A-1998 dated February 3, 1998 - Royal Aviation Inc. carrying on business as Royal and/or Conifair.
File No. U 3570/96-14
In Decision No. 542-A-1996 dated October 28, 1996, the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) made its determination on the application filed by Mr. Kirby Rowe concerning accessibility problems he experienced while travelling with Royal Aviation Inc. carrying on business as Royal and/or Conifair (hereinafter Royal) between Ottawa, Ontario and Orlando, Florida in February 1996.
Although the Agency found that there was no undue obstacle, it required Royal to submit a copy of its training program including the information set out in the Schedule (Section 11) of the Agency's Personnel Training for the Assistance of Persons with Disabilities Regulations (hereinafter the Training Regulations). Royal was further required to provide the Agency with information regarding the training of employees and the result of its investigation into the late delivery of Mr. Rowe's wheelchair.
In Decision No. 37-A-1998 dated February 3, 1998, and following its review of the information submitted by Royal in response to Decision No. 542-A-1996, the Agency required Royal to complete the sensitivity and awareness training of the carrier's flight attendants, as per the requirements of the Training Regulations, no later than ninety (90) days following the date of the Decision.
The Agency also requested Royal to provide, within thirty (30) days from the date of the Decision, an interim report on the status of the sensitivity and awareness training of its flight attendants, as well a final report at the end of the period of ninety (90) days set out above. The final report was to provide verification that all flight attendants who were subject to the Training Regulations had received the training.
Royal was also required to emphasize to airport ground handling agents the importance of the quick delivery of mobility aids on flight arrival by issuing a special bulletin and to provide the Agency with a copy of the bulletin and the list of distribution within thirty (30) days following the date of the Decision.
The issue to be addressed is whether or not the measures undertaken by Royal satisfy the requirements of Decision No. 37-A-1998.
Royal provided a report stating that all permanent flight attendants received the training described in the program used for ground personnel, a copy of which was previously filed with the Agency. The training of the permanent flight attendants was completed on April 23 in Montréal, on April 24 in Vancouver and on April 29 in Toronto. Royal advised that the training of the temporary flight attendants hired for the summer season was completed on May 26 in Vancouver, June 3-4 in Montréal and June 9-10-11 in Toronto.
Royal also provided the Agency with a copy of a bulletin issued by its Manager, Airport Services, to the contracted personnel who provides ground handling services on behalf of Royal at airports in Canada and in the United States. This bulletin emphasizes the importance of timely delivery of mobility aids to passengers after arrivals of flights and requests ground handlers to ensure that this procedure is implemented to ensure same.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The Agency is of the opinion that, although the carrier did not comply with the time limits for action imposed by the Agency, the information submitted regarding the completion of the training of flight attendants and the issuance of a bulletin to ground handlers on the timely delivery of mobility aids satisfy the requirements of Decision No. 37-A-1998.
Based on the above findings, the Agency does not contemplate further action with respect to this file.