Accomodations

It makes sense that “Ask the Lawyer” gets a lot of Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) related questions.  After all, both the ADA and libraries work to reduce barriers—barriers to information, barriers to education, and barriers to services/employment.   

The issue of fragrance sensitivity and ADA compliance brings unique challenges. 

For people living with this disability, the stakes are high: itching, burning, sneezing, rash, nausea, headache, and breathing problems can all result from exposure to even small amounts of fragrance in the air.  And there is no reliable way to predict what precise product might carry the triggering chemical, scent, or compound.[1]

To drill down into the member’s question, if the sole concern the patron has raised has been about access to the bathroom, then it may be that this sole adjustment was sufficient.  However, I have found it is best to work through ADA accommodation issues from a broader perspective, by asking: within attainable, affordable and (thus) reasonable measures, are we doing all we can to reduce barriers to access?

In a bathroom, this could be limited to removing a scented air freshener, as the member has done.  However, it could be that in addition to the air freshener, particular cleaning products, ambient scent entering the bathroom via the air ducts, and other fragrances (some of them on people) are invading the space and triggering the negative impacts.  In that case, the key is to reduce all fragrances in the space (within the bounds of what is “reasonable”), perhaps by:

• changing cleaning products
• changing the HVAC system
• having a scent-free policy

--all of which could be considered an accommodation under the ADA.

Not all of these accommodations, however, are automatically “reasonable.”  Switching cleaning supplies could require a negotiation under the standing contract with a professional cleaner—or could be as easy as selecting fragrance-free products.  A small library with an annual budget of $150,000.00 would find it too expensive to re-route the HVAC at a cost of $200,000.00—but perhaps could install a small window fan, drawing in fragrance-free air, for a much lower (and thus reasonable) cost.  And the “reasonableness” a fragrance-free policy will depend on several factors, based on who it impacts.

A “fragrance-free” policy can be imposed upon employees after due consideration of overall working conditions, any union agreement, and related policies.  However, a “fragrance free” policy for the visiting public poses broader difficulties.  As just one concern: while most libraries will find it reasonable to address extreme hygiene issues that impact everyone (like visitors who may bring the pungent odor of fecal matter[2]) through a “Patron Code of Conduct” to, a facility-wide “fragrance ban” could (ironically) impose limitations on library access.

This is where design—and well-crafted library-specific policy—can help out.  Depending on the library, a climate-controlled area with separate HVAC or windows can be set aside as a “fragrance-free” area.  A sign could say “This area is designated as fragrance-free.  Please observe this restriction in consideration of fragrance-sensitive patrons.”  For libraries considering updating their facilities, although not currently required by current (2010) “Standards for Accessible Design[3],” a room with adequate heating/ventilation/ac (“HVAC”) to achieve this separation is worth considering.

As someone who is addicted to Lush’s “Dirty” body spray (spearmint and tarragon, just the thing to spritz after a stressful day of lawyering[4]), I realize it is easy to write about creating a scent-free space, and hard to navigate the human aspects of policing one.  Further, as discussed, there is no one-size-fits-all approach. The bottom line for compliance is: within the limits of what is financially, operationally, and physically feasible at your library, consideration of a fragrance-free environment should be made.  When the access under consideration is for a bathroom, access to the accommodating facility should be clearly designated, and a bar to fragrances should clearly apply to the space.

A great resource for starting this fragrance-free journey, including sample language for when considering a policy, is https://askjan.org/disabilities/Fragrance-Sensitivity.cfm.  As always, before using cookie-cutter language, it is best for a library to check its charter, bylaws, other policies, lease, and any union agreement before crafting their own, unique policy to meet the needs of their community.

I hope this answer passes your “sniff” test.

This question has two parts, so I will re-state them for clarity:

Is it legal to forward that charge on to the patron as they are the party who cancelled the service?

Answer: no.

If this behavior becomes habitual (a request is made, the patron cancels past the 48 hour minimum time frame, we get invoiced), does the library have any recourse per ADA compliance law?

Answer: yes.

For more on both of these, see below!

This submission to “Ask the Lawyer” is a good companion to a recent query about arranging ASL interpreters, posted under the title “ADA Compliance When Screening Movies” (we’ll call it “Screening Movies”), on January 7, 2019. 

“Screening Movies” sets out some of the fundamentals of ADA compliance in the ASL interpreter realm, so as a foundation for the answer to this question, please take a look at it for some essential background.

[We’ll pause while you read “Screening Movies” and absorb the basics.]

Okay, have you got the fundamentals of ASL-related ADA compliance?  Great!  Now we’ll move to the advanced work required by these questions.

The answer to the member’s first question is “No,” because, per federal regulations[1]:

 (c) Charges. A public accommodation may not impose a surcharge on a particular individual with a disability or any group of individuals with disabilities to cover the costs of measures, such as the provision of auxiliary aids….

While any regulation is of course open to interpretation, the United States Department of Justice—the body charged with enforcement of the ADA—offers this commentary on surcharges related to accommodations:

One medical association sought approval to impose a charge against an individual with a disability…where that person had stated he or she needed an interpreter for a scheduled appointment, the medical provider had arranged for an interpreter to appear, and then the individual requiring the interpreter did not show up for the scheduled appointment. Section 36.301(c) of the 1991 title III regulation prohibits the imposition of surcharges to cover the costs of necessary auxiliary aids and services. As such… providers cannot pass along to their patients with disabilities the cost of obtaining an interpreter, even in situations where the individual cancels his or her appointment at the last minute or is a ‘‘no-show'' for the scheduled appointment. The… provider, however, may charge for the missed appointment if all other[s] … are subject to such a charge in the same circumstances.

In other words, cancellation fees or other obligations imposed upon the general public can be equally applied to those who require ADA accommodations, but any charge specifically related to an ADA accommodation cannot. 

There are, however, several ways to address the need of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing users to change their arrangements.

1.  Renegotiate your interpreter contract to shift away from cancellation fees

This of course requires cooperation by your ASL agency, but it is feasible. 

One approach is to use a contract that guarantees a base or “stand-by” rate that is assured to your provider (regardless of utilization). For example, for $####/year, your organization gets ### hours of services, in up to ### separate instances; this amount is paid not matter what. 

This gives both your library, and the provider, some fiscal stability as you serve the needs of your community.  It is an approach that might not work for libraries with small budgets, but collaboration with a system, council, or network can sometimes use this approach.

2.  Renegotiate your contract to tighten the cancellation window and reduce the fee

24 hours’ notice and a cancellation fee (not paying for the whole service value) is much more reasonable!

Again, this requires cooperation by our agency, and in you location, it might be a seller’s market.[2]  But it doesn’t hurt to negotiate![3]

3.   Know your budget

As described in “Screening Movies,” the obligations of libraries will vary wildly from institution to institution.  What might be “reasonable” to a large urban library might be an “undue burden” [4] for a small village library with a much smaller budget.  But no matter the size or budget, as “Screening Movies” states, every library should have an accommodations plan—and that plan should have a line in the library’s budget.

When a library has a budget for routine ADA accommodations (as opposed to one-time capital improvements or ad hoc needs of employees), it can help provide users with meaningful information about the libraries ability to provide those services.  It can also position your library to show if the cost of an accommodation truly would be an “undue burden,” (and thus not an obligation) as defined by the ADA.

For members of the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing communities, access to information is critical, and a public library’s commitment to assuring it is vital. 

The member’s foresight and attention to stewarding this resource and making it as accessible as possible is exactly what is required.  And as can be seen, just as critical is finance committee and budget input on how to make the most of assets and budgets that help assure access and legal compliance.

[1] 28 C.F.R. § 36.301 “Eligibility criteria.”

[2] A good resource when considering an interpreter contract is here: https://rid.org/about-rid/about-interpreting/hiring-an-interpreter/.

[3] I don’t mean to imply that this member didn’t negotiate.  In my experience, librarians are often tough and forward-thinking hagglers.

[4] Undue burden means significant difficulty or expense. In determining whether an action would result in an undue burden, factors to be considered include –

• (1) The nature and cost of the action needed under this part;
• (2) The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved in the action; the number of persons employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; or the impact otherwise of the action upon the operation of the site;
• (3) The geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites in question to any parent corporation or entity;
• (4) If applicable, the overall financial resources of any parent corporation or entity; the overall size of the parent corporation or entity with respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and
• (5) If applicable, the type of operation or operations of any parent corporation or entity, including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of the parent corporation or entity.

This is an important submission, because access is the mission of every library, and access is the purpose of the ADA.  When it comes to ADA accommodations, an institution’s commitment should always be: plan for access.  

Under that principle, the answers to the member’s questions are:

• When showing a movie, always use some type of assistive technology to ensure accessibility.
• When having a large-scale event, always budget and plan for an ASL interpreter.
• To ensure people can advise the library of the need for specific accommodations, have a well-developed and publicized accessibility policy.

By planning for access, an institution can never go wrong under the ADA.

But the member wants to know: when planning for access, what does the law specifically require?

As always, what the law requires can depend on a lot of different factors.

The ADA and its enabling regulations do expressly require certain entities to use captioning technology.  For example, all commercial movie theaters (except drive-ins), and all televisions built after 1993, must include captioning tech. 

But while a specific requirement for captioning has been an important asset for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing communities for decades, libraries are not on the list of legislated adopters.  Rather, just like any other place of “public accommodation,” libraries have a broader mandate; they must ensure “…no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services….”  

In other words, while captioning is not expressly required at a library, accommodations are.

The ADA doesn’t always mandate the precise means of accommodation; captioning can be but one of the many ways a library ensures a Deaf patron can access a movie.   What’s important is not the precise accommodation, but the removal of a barrier to service.  

That is why a big part of ADA compliance is not just following narrow rules (although there are plenty of those, especially when it comes to design of new buildings or the mass purchase of technology), but keeping up with and considering all available options for access. 

How can a library easily assess all those options?   A great resource for learning about the latest ADA accommodations—organized alphabetically by disability—is AskJAN.org.[1]  Although created primarily for employers (the “JAN” stands for “Job Accommodation Network”), JAN is an invaluable jumping-off place for learning the specific barriers a person with a disability may face when trying to access a service, and how a provider can remove those barriers…within that provider’s budget. 

For example, a search of “deafness” on AskJAN shows—among many other things—an array of “real-time captioning” services, together with providers and a description of how they work; this allows for comparative shopping and a more nuanced use of services.  To use the member’s movie example: if the only version of a movie a library wants to show doesn’t come with captioning, a resource like AskJAN can help find an alternative—which is what the library is required to do.

Which brings us to the heart of the member’s question: what are a library’s specific obligations?  At the start of this answer, I have used the lawyer’s go-to response: “it depends.”  But what does it depend on?

Precise obligations under the ADA vary based on institution type, size and budget.  For example, a very large municipal library with a relatively large budget and older facility should address accessibility questions through their ADA Title II-mandated self-evaluation, compliance policy, and complaint procedure; such an institution should also have to have a “responsible employee” overseeing that procedure.  This is because ADA Title II, which applies to government bodies and agencies, expressly requires a government agency to have those resources in place.[2]

On the other hand, a small association library with a small budget and a new building will fall under different sections of the law, and have somewhat different obligations.

But no matter what section of the ADA applies, the goal remains the same: to not deny service if there is an aid or adjustment that can help…unless that aid or adjustment would fundamentally alter the service, or be an “undue burden” (i.e. too expensive or difficult[3]). 

This is why every library should have a custom-tailored[4] accessibility policy guiding the library’s planning for ADA-related operations (which, at a library, are practically all operations).  While such a policy can take time to implement, and must be updated from year-to-year, in the end it is both a respecter of people and a time-saver, taking the painful guess-work and last-minute planning out of ADA compliance, and helping a library plan for access for all. 

For instance, as suggested by the member, such a policy can set a threshold for when events will automatically have an ASL interpreter, and when/how a patron can notify a library about an accommodation needed at a smaller event.  Further, it can ensure there is a budget line to pay for such accommodations, and that staff are trained and ready to answer accommodations-related questions gracefully. 

A thorough, custom policy will not only pinpoint a library’s specific ADA compliance obligations, it will make sure:

• the library is not making ADA decisions ad hoc (a recipe for a law suit);
• that its documentation shows compliance if a violation is claimed;
• that ADA accessibility is built into budgeting, staffing, training, purchasing, and event planning;
• that the institution is placing the needs of all patrons at the forefront of planning.

If a library doesn’t have such a policy, forming an ad hoc “accessibility committee” comprised of both staff and board members[5], and an attorney, should be a top priority.

How can that play out?  Let’s return to the member’s scenarios. 

With a policy guiding the way, the answers to the member’s questions would unfold in a methodical way.  The library would check the latest alternate assistive technology in the early planning stages of the event.  Consulting AskJAN, they might determine that perhaps remote CART[6] technology can help, and their planned budget line would pay for it.  If the projected attendance is under the threshold set by the policy (determined by considering the library’s area of service), there is no automatic ASL interpreter; however, the publicity and posted policy will include the ways attendees can notify the library of any necessary accommodations.

If, after the movie, there is a complaint about ADA compliance, the policy and documentation showing it has been followed will help resolve the complaint in its early stages.   But more critically, the details of the event will reduce the risk of such a complaint,  since any person who needed accommodation had access that was both well-planned and easy to arrange. 

Thank you for these important questions.

[1] https://askjan.org/a-to-z.cfm

[2] An example of the consequences of non-compliance can be found here: https://www.ada.gov/sacramento_ca_settle.htm

[3] This legal language “undue burden,” causes some of the most painful moments under the ADA.  When a small, budget-challenged institution is forced to call a necessary accommodation a “burden,” no one feels good.  Sometimes the law picks the wrong work; I would have gone with “unduly disproportionate.”

[4] Although seeking inspiration from similar institutions can be a great place to start, an ADA policy is not a document to cut-and paste from another institution. 

[5] Page 62 of the 2018 “Library Trustees Handbook,” is a great resource for a library directors who need to give trustees an summary of the magnitude and importance of this issue.

[6] Communication Access Real-time Translation.