Skip to main content

The Via Rail station is seen in Halifax on June 13, 2013. A deadline is looming for Via Rail to change its policies and allow more than one person travelling in a wheelchair at a time on its trains, or prove that doing so would be far too difficult.

Andrew Vaughan/THE CANADIAN PRESS

A deadline is looming for Via Rail to change its policies and allow more than one person travelling in a wheelchair at a time on its trains, or prove that doing so would be far too difficult.

The Canadian Transportation Agency has ruled that the national passenger rail provider must revise an existing policy by Monday that says only one wheelchair or mobility scooter can be safely tied down on its trains, while any additional ones must be dismantled and stored in the baggage area.

A Toronto-based couple who both use mobility scooters sought the change, contending Via's existing policies risk damaging valuable equipment and discriminate against people with physical disabilities.

Story continues below advertisement

The Canadian Transportation Agency backed the couple in a ruling earlier this year, giving Via until May 15 to either amend the policy or make a case for why doing so would cause the company undue hardship.

But Via has been resisting the federal agency's order, and tried unsuccessfully to bring the matter before an appeal court rather than going through the CTA's channels.

Neither Via Rail nor its lawyers would comment on whether or not it plans to keep fighting the order or comply with the CTA's demands.

The couple that brought the case forward said Via should be embarrassed by its resistance to increasing accessibility for disabled passengers.

Martin Anderson, 47, and Marie Murphy, 54, of Toronto said they've been raising such issues about Via for more than two decades, adding this latest chapter is particularly frustrating.

"Here we have a Crown corporation with a $600 million budget saying, 'Mr. Anderson, why don't you accommodate us, because we don't want to accommodate you,"' Anderson said in an interview.

He and Murphy, who both have cerebral palsy that greatly limits their physical mobility, said they rely on Via's services for much of their leisure travel, as trains are generally best equipped to accommodate their mobility scooters.

Story continues below advertisement

But trips with Via have long been fraught with complications and hassles, the couple said. Via's current policy allows for only one tie-down area per passenger train in which a wheelchair or scooter can be safely stored, according to the organization.

"Once the tie-down ... of a specific train is reserved, the tie-down or the accessible cabin can't be offered to any other passenger travelling within the same city pairs," Via said in a statement.

The rules mean that unrelated passengers booking trips may find themselves unable to safely secure their mobility aids when they travel. In Anderson and Murphy's case, the couple argues it also means they're not able to travel together on the same train.

Murphy said they tried doing so repeatedly over the years, but regularly ran into complications.

The one who did not have access to the only tie-down area had to get on their hands and knees and physically dismantle the scooter so it could be stowed away in the baggage compartment, she said, adding the mobility aids were sometimes entirely covered by suitcases by the time they reached their destination.

Both she and Anderson saw their scooters damaged because of the storage policy, she added.

Story continues below advertisement

The couple has found Via's approach increasingly problematic as they aged, she said, adding they have now opted to take separate trains to the same destination so they can both travel without risks to themselves or their equipment.

"I could not go on my hands and knees just because I don't have the ability, and Martin is having a hard time doing it now," she said. "And ethically, it's just wrong."

Anderson and Murphy's submission to the CTA contends that Via could easily accommodate more than one tie-down area on their trains.

They also point to the fact that a consultant, hired by Via in June 2015, studied the possibility of storing two scooters in one tie-down area on specific models of rail car and concluded it was possible.

Via told the CTA that the results of that report were not yet complete and argued it could not revise its existing policies without "undue hardship."

Via also argued that damage to Murphy's and Anderson's scooters was not a failure of policy, which does stipulate that space in the luggage hold should be set aside for mobility aids if needed, but rather an isolated customer service failure.

Story continues below advertisement

The CTA rejected that argument.

"The fact that those issues have arisen on several occasions with different employees makes it impossible to accept VIA's assertion that the problems experienced by the applicants were nothing more than a customer service issue, and raises concerns regarding the adequacy of guidance and training of personnel with respect to the needs of travellers with disabilities and VIA's responsibilities and procedures in this regard," the decision reads.

The CTA ordered Via to either provide two tie-down areas per train or allow two mobility aids to make use of the same tie-down by May 15. Alternatively, Via could offer evidence that it could not comply without undue hardship.

Via sought leave to appeal the decision at the Federal Court of Appeal, but their application was rejected.

Now, with the deadline looming, the company has still not indicated whether it would comply with or contest the order. Spokeswoman Mariam Diaby said only that the company was working on its next steps.

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies