Is this discrimination

[yorkshirephil]

8 minutes ago, zap99 said:

I was watching some YouTube videos of ultra fit folk hiking long distances at great speed using these poles.. just wondered what the difference was between them and a walking stick. In an emergency Gandalf could stand at the top of the stairs with his staff.......you shall not pass.

[zap99]

14 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

So I wonder what happens if you say you don't need any mobility aids, but you actually take a stick, like I was going to.

There is a whole industry producing Rumrunners. Telescopic walking poles must be available.Hide them in your bags.

[emam]

2 hours ago, FangedRose said:

What would you class it as?  Nobody (now) uses it but as a mobility aid.

 

You have answered your own question. An aid. I wouldn't call a piece of wood a device. 

[terrierjohn]

4 hours ago, 9265359 said:

 

You said that every passenger needed to complete the form. If that was true then a passenger who didn't complete the form would not have complied with the requirements to board so would be denied.

 

You are not seeing thousands of people denied because it isn't necessary for every passenger to complete the form, only those that cannot evacuate unaided.

 

 

It is sensible to collect detailed information from every passenger? That's going to be fun for P&O when they need to recruit hundreds of new staff to review all those forms.

Why on earth do you think they would need extra staff to check forms where passengers have said nothing to report?????

[david63]

5 hours ago, 9265359 said:

That's going to be fun for P&O when they need to recruit hundreds of new staff to review all those forms.

That is a process ideally suited to a computer

[david63]

4 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

So I wonder what happens if you say you don't need any mobility aids, but you actually take a stick, like I was going to.

There are two options:

 

1. You are allowed to take your stick onboard with you.

2. You are denied boarding.

 

The choice is yours

[silversurf]

Reading all this concerned me as I use a wheelchair part time.

I tried checking on my cruise personaliser, but system would not allow me into this part of the form so I phoned my TA who could not get into this form either and advised me to check again in a week ro two.

However, on my original P and O booking it show date of embarkation next to which it says ‘emergency 121 assistance’.

[Windsurfboy]

Nordic walking poles are not mobility aids. However could double up as one.

 

 

[Goosebear Mum]

I would hope common sense would distinguish between trekking poles and walking sticks (they look very different) and the ‘mobility’ of the person carrying them 

[Bubbeh]

On 5/14/2024 at 4:49 AM, molecrochip said:

I personally don’t agree their interpretation.

Don't mean to be rude but it's doesn't matter what you agree with or think, it only matters what the decision makers think.

[Bubbeh]

9 hours ago, david63 said:

Common sense says that but as we know common sense and Carnival do not make good bedfellows!

Common sense and the law sometimes sleep in different beds,  Occasionally in different cabins on different decks!

[molecrochip]

43 minutes ago, Bubbeh said:

Don't mean to be rude but it's doesn't matter what you agree with or think, it only matters what the decision makers think.

Yes I agree. But often I’m asked to explain things and whether I understand why something is the way it is.

 

I know the rule that’s being enforced and i know the reason given but I can’t say that I believe that the two reconcile and I agree that the reasons and situation align.

[Fionboard]

16 hours ago, zap99 said:

I was watching some YouTube videos of ultra fit folk hiking long distances at great speed using these poles.. just wondered what the difference was between them and a walking stick. In an emergency Gandalf could stand at the top of the stairs with his staff.......you shall not pass.

Tried Nordic walking once. A bit like cross country ski-ing. Too strenuous for me. 

[Jonathan Meldrum]

The question whether this is discrimination is governed by s 19(2)(d) of the Equality Act 2010 which requires for civil liability that the service provider "cannot show [the on-its-face neutral measure, in fact adversely affecting someone with a protected characteristic eg disability] to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim." Because this is a technical legal question, it might be best to seek specialist advice from a respectable firm. Be aware there's a three month strict time limit for bringing a case, possibly shorter in practice. 

Edited May 17 by Jonathan Meldrum

[Denarius]

All this seems very tedious. P&O overcomplicating things again? I sail mainly with another line. When I book I am asked whether I will be in need of any mobility assistance under any foreseeable circumstances during the cruise. I answer (truthfully) no, but should I have answered yes I presume that further questions would have been asked. My booking confirmation then includes a specific section headed "Assisance" which states (in my circumstances) "We confirm that you have declined any assistance throughout your cruise. We therefore confirm that you will make your own way on board the ship upon your arrival and are happy not to receive mobility assistance at any point during your cruise." Clear and simple.

[david63]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Meldrum said:

The question whether this is discrimination is governed by s 19(2)(d) of the Equality Act 2010

Whilst the Equality Act has a part to play SOLAS also comes into the frame and I suspect that SOLAS overrides the Equality Act in this case.

[AchileLauro]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Meldrum said:

The question whether this is discrimination is governed by s 19(2)(d) of the Equality Act 2010 

Then think jurisdiction and under which flag does the ship sail.

[Selbourne]

There is yet another case playing out in the media this week of a scooter user being told that he cannot board with his scooter, even though he’d booked an accessible cabin, as he hadn’t declared it via the Onboard Needs Questionnaire in advance.

 

Whilst these instances are usually the fault of the passenger, in every case the reporting paints P&O in a very bad light, in this case “69 year old cancer survivor” who was unable to board (as he couldn’t cope without the scooter) and had to say goodbye to his “crying daughter and family” who had to leave him at the port. 
 

Whilst I understand all the reasons for this, the PR people at P&O must be having a headache with this. I guess at least it’s a different story to the usual “Cruise from Hell” headlines!

[Jonathan Meldrum]

10 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

Then think jurisdiction and under which flag does the ship sail.

 

 

24 minutes ago, david63 said:

Whilst the Equality Act has a part to play SOLAS also comes into the frame and I suspect that SOLAS overrides the Equality Act in this case.

These are legal points, so the answers are going to be yes you're right, or no you're wrong! 🙂 If you don't know for certain the answer to all of them and what to do about it, and I think we're all in that boat, pun not intended, then the best plan might be to get a free consultation from a respectable law firm with a discrimination practice who, if they decide there's a case, can apply for legal aid if eligible, or act on a no-win-no-fee basis if they think the case likely to win. 

[david63]

P&O/Carnival really need to get their act together with this. To me this is something that has been rushed through without thinking it through thoroughly.

 

There are two scenarios at play here - cruises booked prior to this change and cruises booked after the change, but it appears as if a "one size fits all" approach is being done.

 

P&O's marketing strategy is to encourage people to book their cruise two or more years in advance - in itself not a problem. But that creates two issues:

 

1. Anyone who booked a cruise prior to the revised rules may not be aware of the changes and can easily slip through the net. This is compounded by some passengers booking via a TA and as all communication has to go via the TA then unless the TA is aware of the changes the passenger may not be updated with the requirements.

 

2. In two years anything can change with a passenger's health/mobility so it is feasible that when booking that everything is OK but then two weeks prior to the cruise the passenger has an accident which results in the need for a walking stick which obviously will not have been notified and may well result in being denied boarding.

 

As far as I can see there is nothing in P&O's T&Cs that state that if such a situation occurs that upon notification that the passenger cannot be accommodated that the passenger, and travelling companions, would be entitled to a full refund of their fare (it may be there and I have not found it) - and the usual response in this type of situation is to claim off your travel insurance.

 

Unfortunately claiming off travel insurance may not be an option as the travel insurer may decide that you are fit to travel and even if you are successful with the travel insurance claim then almost certainly your premium will increase the following year. In other words you will be being penalised due to an inadequate policy by the cruise line.

 

I have sympathy with the cruise line as they are in an almost impossible situation - make mostly by their own management.

[Windsurfboy]

Everyone who is quoting discrimination law, must realise there is a practical limitation to how many people needing  a evacuation chair a ship can cope with safely. Given it takes 4 members of staff per chair.

 

So at sometime P&O must say NO.

 

What we have is a new system,  that now asks everyone if they need assistance as they book, and that you must answer yes or no to proceed.  It reminds everyone that it is their duty to tell P&O if anything changes. 

 

What we have in this case is errors in communication on one side or other,  perhaps due to the change in procedure. It might be maladministration but not discrimination. 

 

The new stricter system that allocates an assistance chair to all wheelchair users, seems to be right thing to do. To rightly assume anyone who needs a wheelchair can't cope with perhaps 10 flights of stairs without effecting others. It is matter of safety for others.

 

 

Edited May 17 by Windsurfboy

[terrierjohn]

38 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

Everyone who is quoting discrimination law, must realise there is a practical limitation to how many people needing  a evacuation chair a ship can cope with safely. Given it takes 4 members of staff per chair.

 

So at sometime P&O must say NO.

 

What we have is a new system,  that now asks everyone if they need assistance as they book, and that you must answer yes or no to proceed.  It reminds everyone that it is their duty to tell P&O if anything changes. 

 

What we have in this case is errors in communication on one side or other,  perhaps due to the change in procedure. It might be maladministration but not discrimination. 

 

The new stricter system that allocates an assistance chair to all wheelchair users, seems to be right thing to do. To rightly assume anyone who needs a wheelchair can't cope with perhaps 10 flights of stairs without effecting others. It is matter of safety for others.

 

 

Booking via P&O possibly does require the passenger to complete the medical questionnaire before the booking ccan be completed, since I use a TA I don't know if this is true.

However booking via a TA certainly does not necessitate completing the questionnaire at the time of booking. I have only done one booking so far since the new system was brought in, and even though I use  the well known north midlands TA, I gained more info about where to find the form from CC than from them. For anyone not on CC then I suspect they will be flummoxed about where to find the form, especially if they use a smart phone in portraight rather than landscape mode.

However most cruise passengers are aware about the need to complete all the pre cruise data, so IMHO the best place for the form is as the very first item on the pre cruise data, and this data should be completed within, say, 2 weeks of booking the cruise, or earlier if booked after final payment date.

Edited May 17 by terrierjohn

[david63]

40 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

Everyone who is quoting discrimination law, must realise there is a practical limitation to how many people needing  a evacuation chair a ship can cope with safely

Agreed and I am not sure that anybody is disputing that.

40 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

Given it takes 4 members of staff per chair.

I thought that I read that it was two.

 

4 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

this data should be completed within, say, 2 weeks of booking the cruise, or earlier if booked after final payment date.

I would be more inclined to say that it has to be confirmed at two weeks rather than completed otherwise it will become a race as to who gets the assistance but in order for that to be a practical proposition the refund policy needs to get sorted and if you have a booking that cannot be accommodated an automatic refund is processed - no having to make a claim or FCC

[Megabear2]

While the issue is being discussed here generically, some very prominent points are being missed in the OP's case.

 

1. He and his travel agent DID notify at the time of booking about his wheelchair use and DID complete the mobility form to advise of the fact the chair was being provided by Mobility at Sea.

 

2. P&O do not acknowledge receipt of his form.  This could have had implications for the OP on arrival to board if they claimed they never received it.  Looking at my own cruise personaliser the only indication you get the form has been submitted is a statement next to the passengers name: "You previously submitted the questionnaire on 30 March 2024", however the individual does not get any acknowledgement of what this submission amounts to, basically you have no idea what level of assistance P&O are going to provide, if there is anything they might query, or even if the information provided is noted. You are left in total limbo, most normal people would, I believe, expect some sort of acknowledgement that their needs are noted however nothing is offered either on the cruise personaliser or by any other means.

 

Therefore it was not unreasonable for the OP to think it may not gave been received and to therefore resubmit the form.

 

3. As david63 says above circumstances change after booking.  The onboard needs section states: "Please note: if you submit a new questionnaire, it will remove any information previously submitted. Therefore ensure you complete a new questionnaire in full with all of your requirements".  This has extremely interesting connotations for anyone who resubmits a form or indeed fills it in for the first time late into their booking after a change of circumstances.

 

Clearly the OP completing the form a second time has triggered the refusal of his wheelchair and presumably this is because the section I mention here has triggered a message to the onboard needs team that we have a man here who needs double handed assistance and we have no one to offer it.  Answer: tell him no wheelchair.

 

This clause therefore becomes extremely relevant to each and every one of us, able bodied as well.  What would P&O do in this scenario:

 

I book a cruise today, departing December 2025.  I am able bodied, have nothing to notify on booking and am happy all is well.  Unfortunately come October 2025 I trip on the kerb and damage my leg resulting in a period in plaster and physio after it heals.  The medical advice is that I can go on my holiday but I now need to have a temporary wheelchair ashore to help my leg continue it's good progress.  I therefore fill in the form and contact P&O in November.  

 

The next answer is vital.  P&O inform me, sorry you're too late we have no spaces for your chair.  What are my options?  Nowhere does it mention if it would be a refund of my money on cancellation, so the next port of call is your insurer.  Interestingly I've just tried three major insurers for their take on this and have been told if my medical advisers stated I could travel they most likely would not pay out under medical.  So do I stand to lose my money or what?

 

Clearly something P&O need to answer but it's nowhere in the Frequently Asked Questions.  

[david63]

As I said earlier @Megabear2 - an ill thought through, rushed policy.