Weird questions  No we are not renovating our entrance as it is already flat and accessible to those in wheelchairs, or those using walkers. But there wasn't a spot to say that.

For ideas on hjow to become more accessible, without spending any money, check out,

http://accessiblechurch.ca/

Will the results of the survey be made public?

My home  church has started a process where accessibility will be based on hearing from people with various disabilities, differences, and those living with disease. Will the GCO be having a survey which asks people what barriers they face in church, and what measures helped them be included?

Yeah. We are busy ensuring we are compliant under AODA, which is a big burden. Any church in Ontario starting an accessibility project right now is simply stupid, as the build requirements for AODA compliance are yet to be released.

Accessibility is more than building codes. There are different kinds of disabilities, besides physical disabilities.

Mental Disabilities, Learning and Developmental Disabilities, Sensory disabilities (hearing sight, autism etc) are just a few that have barriers to particpating in church.

The AODA is a process, it is not a hard and fast set of rules. It allows for different solutions. It is contextual, thus a new building has different requirements, than an old buidling. No one will be forced to closed or go bankrupt.

Besides why should the church wait until others tell it what is moral. The church can deside what is right and wrong. The church take a lead in accessibility, we are called to a higher standard than the governement. 

We've completed the necessary (legislated in Ontario) AODA reviews & policies for AODA - didn't find it burdensome at all.  it was seen as an opportunity to review our practices to ensure we are doing our very best with regard to welcoming & customer service.   Hamilton Conference did an excellent workshop to help our churches understand the issues & how to write policy. 

Sounds like the usual claptap. I was doing accessibility work in churches long before you were born. Our current focus is AODA. We have put other accessibility work on hold. It's complex, time consuming of limited resources and expensive.

We had a bad workshop in Toronto Conference. We were given a boilerplate policy and have adapted it to our situation. Much of what was asked for we have been doing for years. But the staff time required (along with three other government acts which require compliance) take time away from other mission oriented work.

Ever add up the time spent complying with government regulations? It's actually frightening.

Indeed.  The problem, and it is a consistent problem, is trying to ram square pegs into round holes.  Policies that do not take into consideration the unique characteristics of buildings and communities end up causing far more problems than the original problem.

Yes, I understand the need for universal safety codes but...

there needs to be room for understanding the fiscal, physical and emotional characteristics of individual communities.  Nine times out of ten those communities have the solutions for their problems but can't because they are forced to deal with the wish lists of others.

We're in a giant car heading towards a brick wall and everyones arguing over where they're going to sit.
     David Suzuki

For those of us not in Ontario, could someone please explain what AODA is?

Hi somegal - AODA stands for Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.  It's definition of 'disability' is wide reaching - including some that often would be 'under the radar' for being included as disabled by many others.  So raising awareness about this is a good thing, IMO.

There are 5 standards - the first - Customer Service - rolled out this year, with the remaining 4 to come in the next TEN years.  Yet to come are standards regarding transportation; employment; information & communications and finally built environment (which BTW is listed to apply ONLY to new construction and "extensive" renovation projects - not requiring retrofits).

Do you know if there's any similar legislation in BC? 

Sorry to hear your workshop was not more helpful DKS.  

Yes - it is true that much of the customer service policy stuff is already in place at our church also - so what's the problem with that?  There is always opportunity for improvement and increasing awareness which is valid in my opinion.   As for staff time - we had several volunteer members (one of whom has a disability) take on the task, not staff, and they did an excellent job.

As for taking time away from mission oriented work - is it not part of our mission to be inclusive and welcoming of others, regardless of their abilities?    If I was a member of your congregation, and reading your comments here, I would feel significantly undervalued - and quite likely insulted too. 

Indeed. All four staff who attended felt the same way.

We are a large church. There are roles for staff and for volunteers. This is not something a volunteer was supposed to take up initially, according to the information we were given.

Ah. So without any knowledge of my ministry context, and based solely on my expression of frustration at increasing government regulation and interference in the mission of the church, you pass judgement? Thanks.  

That's funny. The information I have heard from people who are on the cutting edge of AODA and the government have said there is absolutely zero assurance that built environment standards will not apply to existing structures. There is no assurance that retrofits of public buildings may not be required. Most are saying "no one knows". If you have government-based knowledge (a web page url would be helpful), please share it.

Carolla is probalbly familar with the act. She is a professional who works with people with disabilities.

There is not  a similar act in BC-at least that i know of. I'm new to BC but not to my work role.

My predeccor worked hard to get 'attendent washrooms"  These are washrooms large enough for a person using a wheelchar and a helper to use-ideally with a decent height place to lay down and an overhead lift. Best if they have a separate entrance so can be used by either gender-or mixed genders.

All our schools now have these. and the local college and swimming pool.

A  plain Wheelchair accessible washroom doesn't always meet everyone's needs.

Thanks for explaining that Carolla. As far as I know, we don't have a law like that out here, but it sounds like a good one (even if it is hard to implement). What will churches be required to do?

The AODA does not only deal with customer standards. It is just that churches are exempt from the other aspects due to the small number of employees, non profit status and other factors.  

However that does not mean that churches can not decide to do things that examine barriers that effect employees (ministers and support staff).

Churches should also exmaine barriers that face volunteers.

Most important of all to me are the barriers that exist that prevent certain people from participating in governence, both locally, at Presberty and at GC. IMHO opinion our congregational system can only work, if we do not exclude members from particpating, as we do now.   Many people are afraid of allowing thiose with disabilities to particpate, because often they are alos people who support including other groups who are excluded.  This is threatening to some.

Those of us with certain disabilities and who are differently abled are shut out from particpating in things like AGM, Church council, by barriers that could be removed with just a little examination on how we do things. As it stands now our congregational system fails because of a lack of particpation. Many just assume it is because people are not interested. Howevr people are often not interested because barriers exists that make it impossible or just difficult to particpate.

People living with disabilities, and or differently abled are very vunerable to being even further excluded from the life of the church and can be terrified of demanding changes. That is why others need to support inclusion, and stand up for us, when we might be afraid to.  

The biggest barriers to people who are disabled or differently abled are usually  attitudes.  Churches are places where peoples attitudes should be challenged.

The way we are dealing with accessibility in our church is by using a Libertation Theology circle. Thus it is driven by people with disabilities, or thiose differently abled. The only time, the board is asked to do something, is when a project requires significant ammounts of cash, or staff time. However most actions require neither.

"That Don't Impress Me Much"

Could you say more about how people are being excluded? We have a number of people in my congregation with varying levels of abililty, and I don't recall anyone ever being intentionally excluded from joining part of church life in my congregation.

Thats the point behind an accessibility audit, to examine and raise awareness around that which unintentionally create barriers.

i.e No one builds a church with steps to intentionally exclude people.

I can only speak to abrriers I have faced, and they need to be addressed in a way that  also minimise barriers any accomadations might cause to others.   . Barriers can also be of the nature that they exclude people who are not disabled or differently abled.

At one AGM I attended, a big issue was how to word an ad for a second minister.  It involved bascially a debate among the council of what the duties of the new minister would be.  Now as a peson who both was not a member of council and faces a disability with communication barriers, I had certain questions, that I needed to have answers before I felt qualified to vote. The AGM did not have the time to answer my questions.    My opinion was that if the Council was not prepared to give me the back ground information, behind the debate before the AGM, I was not abled to participate in the vote.  If the council wants decisions to be decided by the membrs, than the members should have the information relevant to the question presented to the AGM.  

To include all members information needs to be presented in ways that male this information accessible.  For my disability, that would mean having all reports, and motions to be voted on ahead of time,  With council designating a council member that would be avaiable to answer my questions ahead of time.

Like wise a person who is visibly impaired needs information in braill at the AGM, unless she is given an electronic  copy ahead of time which she can than read with adaptive devices, (which requires more time to use)

AT another AGM I attended of another organsiation, three of us decided to abstain from voting for a new staff. That was because we felt we did not have the information in an accessible format. We had been unable to attend certain information sessions , because one of the three was dieing, and the other two were busy taking care of him.  

Our abstaintion was very objectionable to the members who wanted a unanoumous decision. As a result we we verbally attack and ostracised by members at the meeting and afterward.  One of us died a few weeks later,, and the other two just nevr returned to an AGM , or any other membership meeting.

If members had been informed that people can abstain for various reason at the meeting, it would be more accessible to people who felt that they can contribute on some issues but not others.

Sorry, Alex, that is simply not true. No church is exempt from the provisions of AODA based on size, number of employees or status.  The end result (customer service) is the same, but the means to the end is slightly different.

Would you please stop inappropriately psychologizing and implying motives to people which may or may not be present?

I would be extremely concerned if the membership of a non-church organization were to be voting on the hiring of staff. That is a huge interference between governance and management.

What I was saying is that churches, and compagnies that have small number of employees are exempt from employment standards. That is they are not required to do certain things in order to be able to employ people with disabilities.

  Which I think is wrong. And that while churches are not required to make changes to remove barriers so that they can hire people with disabilities, (minister and support staff)  I believe that churches are morally obliged to.  Because if we preach equity before God, we need to show it as well.

Your comprehension of both what I write and what the AODA says is deeply flawed and shows that all you are concerned about is being right and reconised as an authority. Otherwsie you would have asked for a clarification, rather than just declaring other to be wrong. It is normal to misunderstand others, and institutions.  You should try to interact and listen as well as present your opinions

The Accessibility Standard for Information and Communications will help people with disabilities access sources of information that many of us rely on every day.

For example, it will:

• help people with vision loss access more websites using their screen readers
• expand large print and digital collections in public libraries
• provide students with course information and learning materials in accessible formats.

Some parts of the standard apply only to educational or training institutions.

Learn more

You can learn more about the Accessibility Standard for Information and Communications by reading the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation.

STandards for employment, and standards for communications, are just two standards that do not apply to certain compagnies or organisations based on various critieria, including size.

But that's not what you said.

I am no authority. I just know what I know and what I have been told by those who know a hell of a lot more than I do.

You, on the other hand, insist on implying motive and try to psychologize where it is simply not warranted.

"At one AGM I attended, a big issue was how to word an ad for a second minister.  It involved bascially a debate among the council of what the duties of the new minister would be."

And this is not the business of a congregational meeting.  Nor is it the business of the council.  THe congregational meeting appoints people to do this work.  And so it should never have devolved into what you describe.  I am assuming in your example about "hiring an new staff" that you are discussing the calling of a minister.  Otherewise that also is not a Congregational meeting item.  ANd it if is then the challenge is that a) the committee may not know how you need the information presented and b) the information is not to be released until the meeting and so unless the committee has a member who is able to prepare it in multiple formats then it can't be done {which means that we need to provide information about how to present and prepare information before the meeting, plausibly as part of the orientation to the search committee work}

Alex you said churches are exempt from AODA, not employment standards and DKS differed.  That is when you started talking about employment standards.  THey are different things and, as has been noted, much of what will actually be required under AODA has not yet been released (and the last information I had before leaving Ontario was that they would not be for some time).

It seems to me that all a person with this sort of disability should have to do is ask for this information ahead of time. People may not be able to predict the needs of others, but we should be willing to accommodate them, to the best of our abilities, once we are made aware. In the case where it is not possible to give the information out in advance, then there should be enough time allotted during the meeting for questions and answers. For an AGM, congregations are required to have their annual reports available at least one week in advance. Ours, in addition to having print copies at the church, are put up online (minus the financial report which is available, upon request, by email) and that is how my blind friend is able to read them.

Actually it is only best practice (and for good reason) that annula reports are availabel one or two weeks before the meeting.  IT isn't really required as far as I can remember.  In fact the Manual doesn't even say what is required to be in said report other than a "general report" and some specific financial information. 

Even for information that can not be released until the meeting there should be thought given to how it is presented.  PArticularly if it has been made known that someone in the community needs it presented in a method that falls outside what is normally thought of.

I would agree with you, but the wording of the ad was what the council brought to the AGM. It seemed to me that it was also a substitue for some other division on council, that I was aware of, for I was completely dismissed when I asked questions and made suggestions. I sensed that something else was gouing on.   Regardless it made the AGM very inacessible, and likely discourgaed other membrs from attenmding another AGM.

What also oput me off, was that the annual report and the finacial staemebnts were not available ahead of time, in order to giove me time to look it over.

What I said was "The AODA does not only deal with customer standards. It is just that churches are exempt from the other aspects due to the small number of employees, non profit status and other factors.  "

The AODA also has different timelines for different organisations. Also it requires more than "standards" f.  It also requires "audits" and it requires these audits be made avaiable publically.  These audits were mandated sevral years ago. Howver not all are required to do them. 

Anyways my point is that churches are often exempt from many aspects of the AODA.(due to various factors)  But just becasue they are exempted from some aspects of the AODA, does not mean they should not do what they are exempted from. Nopr do they need to wait to due what is right.

. 

The AODA also includes and does not replace the ODA, (Ontarians with Disability Act) which had requirements but did not provide for penalties.   Here is the section regarding audits. Howevr the ODA had the same requirments, byut most ignored them because there were not pennalities.

 Here is one requirement that is a not a standard required under the AODA. It also existed under the ODA, but this is from the AODA.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2011/elaws_src_regs_r11191_e.htm

Accessibility plans

4.  (1)  The Government of Ontario, Legislative Assembly, designated public sector organizations and large organizations shall,

(a) establish, implement, maintain and document a multi-year accessibility plan, which outlines the organization’s strategy to prevent and remove barriers and meet its requirements under this Regulation;

(b) post the accessibility plan on their website, if any, and provide the plan in an accessible format upon request; and

(c) review and update the accessibility plan at least once every five years.

(2)  The Government of Ontario, Legislative Assembly and designated public sector organizations shall establish, review and update their accessibility plans in consultation with persons with disabilities and if they have established an accessibility advisory committee, they shall consult with the committee.

(3)  The Government of Ontario, Legislative Assembly and designated public sector organizations shall,

(a) prepare an annual status report on the progress of measures taken to implement the strategy referenced in clause (1) (a); and

(b) post the status report on their website, if any, and provide the report in an accessible format upon request.

(4)  The Government of Ontario, Legislative Assembly, designated public sector organizations and large organizations shall meet the requirements of this section according to the following schedule:

1. For the Government of Ontario and the Legislative Assembly, January 1, 2012.

2. For large designated public sector organizations, January 1, 2013.

3. For small designated public sector organizations, January 1, 2014.

4. For large organizations, January 1, 2014.

The AODA was adopted by unanimous consent in 2005. Howevr because even the Ontario governement failed to meet it's requirements, it was admended to change the deadlines for meeting certain  requirements earlier this year. 

The reason I am informed about this is because of the failure of the Ottawa Hosptial to accomated me for barriers resulting from Autism, for my HIV.  Thus because I need accomation for Autism, I was unable to get treatment for HIV at the hospital.

DKS - here is the link to the reference regarding built environment standard for accessibility - hope you will find it useful.  http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/accessibility/other_standards/builtenvironment/index.aspx

Is there every any bullet-proof guarantee that any goverment will do what it says?  No.  But for now, this is what is said, on the government website. 

No actually I was not judging you DKS.  I was however letting you know how your words might affect me, as a congregational member, and possibly one with a disability.   Just feedback ... for thought or not. 

Thoughtful article from the Observer this month ... "Church is for Everybody"

http://www.aoda.ca/?p=1588

Just to remind everyone: The survey is at

www.surveymonkey.com/s/uccAccess

and,

The deadline for responses is Dec. 16. Thank you!

Sorry martha - yes, it is one of those wandering conversations!

Serve-Ability: Transforming Ontario’s Customer Service / Service-ABILITÉ : Renouvellement des services à la clientèle de l’Ontario

This course will help you better serve customers with disabilities. It will take approximately 45 minutes to complete. Decision makers completing the course should set aside about 20 minutes. Enjoy the course!

Serve-Ability is designed to be accessible to everyone. You can navigate with the use of a keyboard, review the course with a screen reader (JAWS) and run closed captioning.

The Flash version can be used by anyone using a computer with Flash version 9 or higher.

http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/serve-ability/splash.html