Technical baseline clause revisited?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Technical baseline clause revisited?

Karen Lewellen
Good morning everyone,
Before I start let me express my appreciation  to each of you for your
commitment to inclusion.  At the end of the day the resources alone at least
for me  fortifies my hope.
I have what I trust is a simple question,  although  the situation is a
tad complex.
A couple of years back at least we discussed the technical baseline
clause, how some companies use this to avoid compliance  even with basic
things like keyboard functioning by stating they use say jaws, You must
as well.
My understanding then was that a company cannot place such requirements on
  the general public.
Can anyone document for me if this remains the case?
I have one of those situations that if I used what the company is claiming
I must use...it would actually do me physical harm.
so I want to share with the mediator that making such requirements
violates WACG in general.  I am in Ontario and was told privately that the
AODA  incorporates WACG into its standards.  The Ontario Human Rights Code
has a greater level of mandate  undue hardship,  meaning regardless the
company is violating the latter, but they are claiming the former.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Kare