$25000 Ticket on the Chicago-Bloomington Run

rohr turbo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:15 pm

Tadman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:24 am ... and it's also more evidence that NPR didn't do any reporting, they just did regurgitating. Why just ask the aggrieved here? Why not call a few bus companies? What does that take, ten minutes?

Zero. Primary. Sources.

In all your angry diatribes, you've yet to point out any factual error in the reporting. And NPR DID go to Amtrak several times for comment. And what for god's sake would 'bus companies' say that is relevant to this story??

Now that the story has been picked up by a wide range of news outlets, all reporting basically the same set of facts, your (and John Perkowski's) vitriol toward NPR looks all the more ridiculous.

Amtrak screwed up. NPR reported it first, and accurately. Public backlash, including a Senator. Amtrak then revised its policies for the better. Follow up reports published.

A good outcome all in all.

Absolutely not.

I haven't pointed out any factual errors as NPR took a tiny sliver of a story, regurgitated it, and called it reporting. NPR is 100% correct. Amtrak asked a group for a $25,000 price tag. Open and shut.

But the implication is that Amtrak is discriminatory, mean, whatever, and they completely failed to do any further reporting. They did exactly what the press did in the Ifills article and the Michigan Central article. Took a tiny sliver of a story, sliver being factually correct, and printed it way out of context, with no primary sources, no site visits, just sat in their coffee shop and painted a real nasty picture.

It's also the same thing I did when I made up a story and infuriated a bunch of people that resorted to calling me names because my "reporting" was 100% correct and they fell for it.

In absolutely all of the cases above, the sliver of reporting was correct but the the true story is not. Amtrak is very accommodating to minorities and those with disabilities. I helped a sick family member navigate a special needs situation a few years back and the help from the Amtrak team was astoundingly good.

But the media always has an ax to grind, and today it was with Amtrak. Same with New York Times.

"The media". lol, well, hello Mr Fox News , who apparently are not part of "the media", they constantly complain about.
If I was Amtrak I would be careful when dealing with this kind of "access" issue. Low platforms , narrow doors , steep steps and even stairs. They could paint a pretty grim picture to politicians or regulatory bodies. Of course buses (and in some cases planes ) have similar or worst issues , but they are not a government funded or quasi government organisation .
On the other hand, Amtrak could turn it back and say , ok, we are happy to comply , here's how much it will cost, will we gt it in the next appropriation.

David Benton wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 12:25 am On the other hand, Amtrak could turn it back and say , ok, we are happy to comply , here's how much it will cost, will we gt it in the next appropriation.

That is how a lot of government entities handle accessibility issues. Many on here are fixated on Amtrak being operationally dependent on the Federal government, but it is far harder to get government compliance with the ADA than it is with a private entity. As long as the government entity is not updating the antiquated infrastructure in any way, it can get away with a lot. A great example of this are municipalities not paving around intersections to avoid having to install new curb ramps. The rest of the street will be repaved, but the intersection will only be partially patched. It would be quite easy to solve this problem if Amtrak or a transit agency was pushed... eliminate service to stations without adequate platforms already.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:28 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:53 am ADA was never actually violated. Nobody was denied transportation, and reasonable accommodation was offered but declined.

A $25000 fee being "reasonable"? Reread this thread. Everyone else agrees it's not. (And if you stand by that, I'll have to index "reasonable" to being "not affordable by a normal person up to middle class").

The reasonable accommodation was to split the party across two trains, since between the two trains they had the desired capacity. Altering travel plans like this is considered reasonable by the ADA - it's the justification for all the (poorly performing, but legal) dedicated request-a-ride services provided by transit authorities in the Northeast.