|
|
Posted by Harlan Messinger on 10/03/07 15:33
Relayer wrote:
> On Oct 3, 9:42?am, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Relayer wrote:
>>> If he can't see the screen, then he needs to actually GO to Toys R Us
>>> and apply.
>> You evidently know nothing about how blind people use the Internet or
>> about Web accessibility. There is nothing preventing Toys R Us from
>> making their website accessible.
>
> Again, if he can't GET to Toys R Us to apply for a job, how the hell
> can he work there doorknob?
Who said he can't get there?
> It's these bullshit egregious lawsuits that make being disabled
> difficult for everyone. Toy's R Us are under no obligation to hire
> someone who is blind
Now it's evident that you are ignorant of the law. They are obligated to
hire him judging him under the same criteria as they would apply to
anyone else as long as he can do the job with reasonable accommodation.
> nor make their website acceeible to an applicant
> who is. Their stores, where jobs are also applied for, as handicapped
> accessible. It would be nice but they are under no legal obligation
> as of yet to do so.
> In addition, the Target suit is regarding shopping, not employment,
> which is a WHOLE different animal.
Employment and public accommodation are covered by the same act, the
Americans with Disabilities Act, so it isn't a *whole* different animal.
If not making their website accessible to the shopping public is found
to be an ADA violation, it's hard to imagine that failure to make their
online job application accessible wouldn't be.
> And the Target suit is certainly not a winnable case.
How do you figure?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|