• Jump to Left Menu
  • Jump to Right Menu
  • Jump to Main Content
  • Jump to Footer
  • Accessibility Page
IT-Director.com Logo

 

Main navigation - go to a section of this website:

  • ARCHIVE
  • PAPERS
  • EVENTS
  • NEWSWIRE
  • BLOGS

  

Register | Login to Member's Area

 
 
DOMAINS
  • Enterprise
  • SME
  • Business Issues
  • Technology
  • Services
  • Channels
FEATURED EVENTS
  • Information Process Quality Improvement
    19th March - 21st March
    London, United Kingdom
  • Convergence Summit North 2012
    17th April - 18th April
    Manchester, United Kingdom
POPULAR PAPERS
  • Best practices for cloud security by Bloor Research
USEFUL LINKS
  • Last 7 Days
  • Archives
  • Top Articles
SHARE THIS PAGE
  • Delicious Icon Delicious
  • Digg Icon Digg
  • reddit Icon reddit
  • Facebook Icon Facebook
  • StumbleUpon Icon StumbleUpon
CONTENT FEED

Sitewide
RSS Feed:

RSS Icon

What is RSS?

RANDOM QUOTE
Famous Slights - "Lots of folks confuse bad management with destiny." - Kin Hubbard

PAGE TOOLS
  • Request Reprints
  • Tell A Friend
  • Contact Author
RECENT POSTS
  • Android: Ice Cream Sandwich Accessibliity
  • The accessibility bugs project - good start, more to do
  • Inaccessibility of mobile apps and ebooks
  • Animated gifs are a turn off
  • OneVoice announced a major web accessibility initiative at e-access 11
  • OneVoice Initiative to be Announced at e-access 11
ADVERTISEMENT
BLOG ARCHIVE
  • February, 2012
  • November, 2011
  • July, 2011
  • June, 2011
  • May, 2011
  • April, 2011
  • March, 2011
  • January, 2011
  • November, 2010
  • October, 2010
  • September, 2010
  • August, 2010
Blogs > Abrahams Accessibility

Court cases and accessibility - act now before it hurts

Peter Abrahams By: Peter Abrahams, Practice Leader - Accessibility and Usability, Bloor Research
Published: 9th March 2007
Copyright Bloor Research © 2007
Logo for Bloor Research

There are two cases, that I am aware of, moving through the courts in the US relating to accessibility of IT solutions.

The first is being brought by a customer of target.com. Target.com is the e-commerce arm of Target that has a US-wide chain of department stores. The design of the web site makes it inaccessible to the blind, and thereby violates federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination against the disabled. The first stage of the case revolved around whether the law applies to the website, as compared to the physical stores, the basic answer is yes with some legal niceties. Target do not deny that the site has accessibility problems.

In fact it is difficult to understand why Target decided to contest the case. I am sure that a reasonably modest out-of-court settlement and an agreement to resolve the technical issues over a reasonable period of time would have been acceptable to both sides. There is now no doubt that Target are going to have to improve the website to make it more accessible both from a social responsibility and a commercial point of view. It also now seems highly likely that the claimant will receive damages and costs. If Target do nothing other claimants will learn lessons from this initial case and be able to sue more effectively.

I am convinced that over the coming year we will see announcements from Target to say they have improved the website and I would hope that they will be able to share a Massive Business Case for Accessibility, similar to Legal & General story I reported on recently.

The second case is where The National Federation of the Blind and three state employees have filed a lawsuit against Oracle Corp. and the state of Texas, seeking to ensure that all applications used by the state government are accessible to blind state workers.

The state of Texas installed a new human resources package from Oracle PeopleSoft. The selection process did not check that the package would be accessible to blind employees. The system that was being replaced had been used successful by a number of employees and managers with vision impairments. With the new system a blind employee cannot update or even view their own records without help from a sighted colleague. Even more seriously a manager cannot view the records of his direct reports without help from a third party. This obviously causes serious privacy and confidentiality issues.

Undoubtedly these cases are not good publicity for any of the defendants and will require executive time and effort to resolve. Oracle and Target happen to be in the spotlight but it could easily have been another enterprise or supplier of IT solutions.

Every enterprise and supplier must recognise that they could be next. They should also recognise that retrofitting accessibility is difficult and expensive, and is likely to end up with a sub-optimal solution.

Vendors, in particular, should not wait for a court case before acting. Software vendors, consultants, system integrators and developers should act now before they are:

  • Summarily taken off a short list because the tender requires accessibility as an absolute given.
  • Sued for providing a solution that is not fit for purpose, which might well be much more costly than a breach of the accessibility legislation.
  • Castigated by investors for a lack of corporate social responsibility.

Vendors, if you have a good story to tell, now is the time to make it public so that you can steal a march on the competition. If you do not have a good story, now is the time to put a plan in place to resolve the issues. Bloor Research will be happy to help you in either situation.

Reader Comments

Posted: 9th March 2007 | By Mark Sheldon :

"Should software applications used in the workplace comply with the DDA & have some measure of ergonomics quality applied to them to reduce risk of RSI?"

A legal case such as Oracle Peoplesoft could make a clear ruling for web services that are used in the workplace.

Posted: 12th March 2007 | By Rimsco :

My company have long been advocates of "assistive technology" for all computer systems, especially those used in the workplace. We believe it is far worse to deny a disabled person a job because they are unable to use a specific computer system than to deny access to a public website where the website owners lose revenue by their failure to accomodate disabled people. Yet in the UK government/local government procurements for computer systems completely disregard accessibility issues.
It is a simple matter to include accessibility aids in systems, and it should be mandatory NOW for systems used in government.

The messages above were all contributed by IT-Director.com readers. Whilst we take care to remove any posts deemed inappropriate, we can take no responsibility for these comments. If you would like a comment removed please contact our editorial team.

We automatically stop accepting comments 180 days after a post is published. If you would like to know more about this subject, please contact us and we'll try to help.



  • Report errors / Make Suggestions
  • | Site Map
  • | Terms of Use
  • | Privacy

Published by: IT Analysis Communications Ltd.
T: +44 (0)190 888 0760 | F: +44 (0)190 888 0761