Why Ontario Is Failing Disabled Citizens
Background
In 2005, recognizing the history of discrimination against persons with disabilities, the province of Ontario took a global leadership role in setting legislative Accessibility Standards for an inclusive society. The purpose of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) was to develop, implement and enforce accessibility standards, with the goal of removing barriers for activities and opportunities for disabled individuals, to achieve a fully inclusive Ontario by January 1, 2025.
The core principles of the AODA (Dignity, Independence, Integration, and equality) were designed to benefit all Ontarians with respect to economic prosperity and becoming more globally competitive. Projected economic impact studies revealed that Increased efficiency, productivity, and creation of new intellectual property would produce economic growth benefits; Stronger leadership and more productive employees, more effective talent recruitment, more innovative products and use of new technology, stronger customer relationships, and a better overall reputation.
Every four years, the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario appoints someone to review the AODA progress. Based on public feedback the reviewer writes a report on how effective the AODA mandates are with respect to the improved quality of life for Ontarians with disabilities. The fourth AODA review, submitted to the Ontario government in June 2023, echoes those concerns expressed in the prior three reviews. It states that Ontarians with disabilities encounter many barriers every day, and the lack of progress on the creation, implementation, and enforcement of AODA standards impacts the well-being and safety of Ontarians with disabilities.
CBC News: Ontario accessibility in crisis, says report quietly released by Ford government
The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario AODA progress report 2022
shows efforts made in building awareness about accessibility, encouraging AODA compliance and enforcing AODA compliance based on the motto Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much
. However, I find reconciling this progress report with the Fourth Review is challenging.
I believe the Ontario government has made sincere efforts to implement and enforce AODA standards, but I have to question if those efforts are relevant. Obviously the lived experience for Ontarians living with a disability has not improved since 2005. So, what is the problem in keeping Ontario from becoming a fully inclusive society?
The Big Picture
Productivity is a measurement of efficiency, and efficiency determines satisfaction, which defines our standard of living. Unfortunately, according to business reports, productivity has been stagnating in Canada for far too long. The productivity level of small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) compared to large firms fell from 63% in 2019 to 58% in 2023.
It is suggested that Canadian companies spend significantly less on innovation, than that in other countries, which has had an impact on productivity. However, I believe declining productivity has more to do with the procurement of innovative technologies that are difficult to use and have limited user support. Ontario, the most populous province of Canada, has a disability population of about 15.4%, and is the largest economy in Canada, making up around 38% of Canadian gross domestic product (GDP). Yet, despite government efforts, most Ontario organizations remain unaware of the AODA requirements, and disabled Ontarians remain under employed.
Carolyn Rogers, Bank of Canada Senior Deputy Governor, says Canada needs to focus more on making sure the training and education we provide teach the skills we need for jobs today and in the future.
Reconciling Reality With Perception
What happened to the expected economic growth benefits for Smarter leadership and more productive employees? It appears that leaders in Ontario have willfully neglected the needs of people with disabilities and have focused on the wants of the majority. Leaders today have a complex world in which to navigate, and must be aware of social trends and the impact their decisions will have. Reports indicate that effective listening is a quality that needs leadership attention, as the empathy skills of leaders has diminished over the past decade.
In many of our large organizations, primary decision makers have distanced themselves from employee daily lived experiences. Senior leaders that delegate responsibility to management without understanding the management training and resource requirements that are needed to fulfill expectations are willfully blind to the needs of disabled people. They get a filtered view of the work environment through management that are competing for promotions and struggling with available resources.
The small business owner is overwhelmed with government regulations and technology challenges. They are too often misled by false marketing information about procured products that claim accessibility standards, and do not have credible resources to educate themselves.
In situations like these, talented people living with a disability are overlooked, which creates a work environment of frustration and distrust. Far too often procurement of inaccessible workplace tools result in the dismissal of a disable employee, with a payout and non-discloser agreement, instead of leadership taking action to ensure standards are followed.
Conclusion
Ontario government ministers and deputy ministers have not been educated in the implementation of AODA standards, which has resulted in a growing gap of prosperity in Ontario. It is estimated that 97.9% of businesses are small businesses, with more than 74% of these having less than 10 employees. Since those with less than 50 employees do not have to report on their AODA activities, most Ontario organizations believe that they are exempt from complying with the AODA regulations.
Issue One
The AODA is currently failing People with Disabilities as the provincial Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility (MSAA) has no meaningful enforcement, lacks significant knowledge skills in understanding the functional needs of people with disabilities, leadership is weak in providing stakeholder guidance, and there is no accountability process to Ontarians with disabilities.
A MSAA online public directory providing information on AODA issues, actions taken and outcomes, would allow stakeholders to work closer together in finding solutions.
Solution One
Over the past twenty years, the Ontario Ministry for Seniors And Accessibility (MSAA) has failed to mature in its role as a leader in promoting full societal inclusion. Effective communication skill is a critical talent in providing an open and transparent platform for stakeholder dialog. That is, Collaboration is the intersection for Creativity and Innovation.
We seem to have an environment of dueling monologs in Ontario, when it comes to the implementation and enforcement of the AODA regulations. On one side of the MSAA there is the bureaucratic policy decision makers that have a legalistic view of the AODA, and on the other side there is the Ontario disability community that has a lived experience of the AODA. It appears that the communication barrier between these two stakeholders has prevented meaningful progress in the implementation and enforcement of the AODA standards. Any organization that has two independent systems must provide an interface protocol that both systems understand, in order to create a platform for meaningful dialog.
Dignity, the first human rights principle, is gained through the power of knowledge, which is achieved by bridging the barrier between perceiving information and understanding that information. The AODA message has been perceived but not understood. A communication platform that encourages stakeholder dialog in sharing, listening and responding to each other is required to bridge the gap between perceiving and understanding.
The Ontario MSAA must shift its strategic planning focus to the second part of the motto Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much
. An online public directory that tracks AODA violations, solutions, and information sharing is the first step in shifting that motto from good intentions to meaningful actions. That initiative must overcome the number one societal disability barrier challenge of arrogance and willful blindness toward AODA compliance attitudes. The MSAA must be given the knowledge to ensure proper AODA implementation, and the power to hold ministry decision makers across Ontario for accountability to ensure AODA enforcement.
If the Ontario MSAA is unable, or unwilling, to take on the responsibility in hosting a stakeholder communication interface, then the Ontario disability community must find a way to work together in resolving the Ontario disability dilemma. All stakeholders must collaborate to stimulate creativity in generating innovative solutions that will remove barriers for a fully inclusive society.
Issue Two
the Ontario Community Infrastructure program supports municipalities in modernizing their infrastructure, to create more efficient, healthier and more prosperous communities across Ontario. However, many municipalities do not include a disability study in their revitalization projects, and the provincial government appears to have no mandate for this requirement. So, disabled Ontarians continue to struggle with inadequit digital services, transit services, audible pedestrian signals, curb cuts, and a muted community voice in the municipal decision making process.
Solution Two
Independence, the second human rights principle, promotes enablement, which is achieved by bridging the gap between accessibility techniques and user experience. The curb cut, or the power door, is a solution to a physical barrier, and the accessible communications is a solution to bridge the information barrier. The municipal decision makers must understand the nature of these barriers in order to ensure effective city planning. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has the responsibility for overseeing and enforcing the provisions of the Planning Act. This act is meant to integrate community input, environmental health, economic growth and development. However, the provincial mandate for the Planning Act has no clear strategy for integrating the AODA standards, and for the most part, municipalities across Ontario are not held accountable for inaccessible infrastructure implementation.
Each of the 444 municipalities within Ontario are required to establish an Access Advisory Committee (MAAC), but beyond having a disability there is no defined skillset for membership on those committees. The MAAC is an AODA checkbox for municipal decision makers, but in many cases have not assigned any real value to the MAAC activities, and the Ontario AODA enforcement has not held them accountable for AODA non-compliance. In most cases, the MAAC has little influence over city council deliberations, and little contact with the local disability community. In my experience, complaints about inaccessible bus transit or inoperable audible pedestrian signals go unresolved. Complaints about screen reader inaccessible city websites tend to be ignored, or claims of vendor certified compliance override the user experience. Municipal Accessibility Advisory Committees provide important insight and direction for municipalities in building accessible and inclusive communities, and must be fully integrated into the decision making process.
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) is a non-profit organization representing municipal and regional governments in the Canadian province of Ontario. The AMO supports the Ontario government’s vision for future communities through collaborative efforts for Growth planning, planning and investment, demographic changes, economic development, employment trends, land use planning, and population health strategies. Accessibility and inclusion are more than meeting municipal obligations under Ontario’s AODA Standards, and the AMO has an important role to play in supporting MAAC efforts. Although the AMO may have less than 50 employees, and the MAAC consists of volunteers, the MSAA must establish a process of accountability to ensure user enablement is being achieved in all Ontario communities.
We can change the direction of municipality AODA non-compliance by holding the MAAC accountable for local policy decisions in their community. The Ontario MAAC teams, all 444 committees, must take a leadership position by creating a network of collaboration, and establishing a key role in the AMO policy forum. The AMO should be held accountable to the MSAA for reporting and resolving municipality AODA non-compliant issues.
If the Ontario MSAA is unable, or unwilling, to engage the AMO with support resources and incentives that will empower MAAC inclusion efforts, then the disability community must find a way to ensure that municipalities do not use public money in creating new barriers. The local community MAAC must make their voice heard, and mandate implementation standards across the province.
Issue Three
Large member organizations like business, entrepreneur and consumer associations must be held accountable for AODA compliance, even if they have less than 50 employees. Providing them with the necessary resources would give them the responsibility to educate their association members and advocate for disability rights within their sphere of influence.
Accessibility gaps in society occur when small businesses source products and services from third party vendors that do not have accessibility standards. By shifting responsibility to these commerce influencers the MSAA would be able to focus their audit efforts, ensure small businesses are educated properly and give disabled Ontarians a strong advocate voice.
Solution Three
The most aggreges violation of AODA regulations is in the Ontario private sector. With more than 80% of companies in Ontario having less than 50 employees, the monitoring and enforcement of AODA regulations is overwhelming, since they do not have to report on their activities. These small companies are dependent upon business associations for guidance and third party vendor for business solutions, which is lacking when it comes to the AODA standards.
Integration, the third AODA principle, is inclusive when the barriers between passive and active participation are removed. Inclusion focuses on creating environments that adapt to and embrace diversity, while integration often implies that individuals need to adapt to the existing environment. That is, accommodating does not necessarily remove the Barriers to full participation, innovation, availability and affordability. Assuming you have access to the information and able to act independently upon your options, are you an active participant or a passive observer? Creating alternative text content to accommodate the needs of blind persons is not sustainable by a small business in the long term, but creating accessible communication formats, from the start, will assimilate all people into the business process without the need for special services.
Small business ventures, and not for profit organizations that support them, must be held accountable for their AODA inclusive best practices. For the most part, the Ontario private sector is bombarded with misleading and false information about accessibility innovative solutions and inclusion diversity strategies. The Ontario MSAA provides general information about the AODA regulations, but there is a huge gap in the education of accessibility implementation. Deploying digital tools, that are inexpensive and require minimal training like Accessibility AI Overlays, tend to violate AODA communication standards and foster ignorance of disability needs. This is not a long term growth prosperity strategy for the province.
Business, entrepreneur and consumer associations have the power to advocate for their members and the disability community. These associations, although may have less than 50 employees, must be held accountable to the thousands of business members by providing guidance in the purchase of workplace tools that comply with AODA standards. When small business owners procure digital tools, they must ensure that they have been designed with accessibility in mind. Accommodating for individual diversity needs is more costly than assimilating individuals by adopting inclusive business values.
If the Ontario MSAA is unable, or unwilling, to enforce AODA compliance in the small business sector of Ontario, then the disability community must find a way to provide business associations with support resources and incentives, that will empower small business owners to advocate for disability rights. Shifting responsibility to the business associations will create an environment of collaboration. Knowledge is power and education is the best weapon against ignorance.
Issue Four
The ministry for economic development must be held accountable in making digital communications accessible, and ensuring public money is not used to create new barriers. Business entrepreneurs must focus on activities that add value for their customers. this means making an investment into processes and technology that focuses on the needs of people. As disability rates increase the need for companies to design experiences to delight this demographic is essential for Ontario's competitiveness.
A significant proportion of persons with disabilities are facing physical and attitudinal barriers in employment in Ontario. The productivity barriers restricting employee efficiency include inaccessible technology, lack of materials in alternate formats, physically inaccessible spaces, and discriminatory attitudes towards persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities who are working often have lower paying jobs that have less stability, fewer benefits, and limited chances for career growth. In 2022 Ontario had an unemployment rate of 6.0% for the general population, 22% for those with a disability, and 72% for those with vision loss. Far too many Ontarians with vision loss continue to be dependent on social assistance or forced into the shadow economy.
Solution Four
Equality, the fourth human rights principle, is satisfaction that is measured by quality performance indicators in bridging the barriers between chaos and stability. Stability is satisfaction.
There are two enforcement social-economic policies that must be considered.
First, the Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade must be held accountable for online accessible funding forms to include entrepreneurs with disabilities, and recipients of financial incentives must be given a framework of training and AODA mandates in creating products and services. This provincial ministry is given responsibility for supporting an innovative economy that can provide jobs, opportunities, and prosperity for all Ontario residents, but has failed to consider the needs of the disability community.
Second, the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development must be held accountable for employment standards in providing training and career resources that comply with the intended goals of the AODA regulations. This ministry tends to shift responsibility of disability employment programs to charitable and not for profit organizations. Small businesses must not be forced to depend upon charitable services to meet AODA employment standards.
If the Ontario MSAA is unable, or unwilling, to enforce Ministry accountability, then the disability community must mount a collaborative effort to apply compliance pressure on the Ontario government. Enforcement cannot be mandated if there is no accountability and no framework for AODA implementation guidance.
Issue Five
The Ontario education system is failing people with disabilities, as the ministry is not accountable to anyone for insufficient support and not integrating accessibility standards into the core curriculum. Each year graduates of computer science and business continue to broaden the prosperity gap by introducing new accessibility barriers. This trend is at the core of Ontario's productivity decline.
Solution Five
Although the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) ranks Ontario students 7th in the world, it seems that innovation and human right standards are not considered in this score card. Since education is tightly linked to economic progress, and the high unemployment of persons with disabilities in Ontario is one of the biggest barriers to prosperity, it would appear that the implementation of AODA standards is one of our biggest failures in our education system.
The solution is simple; Education, accountability and Enforcement. Ministers and Deputy Ministers must be educated and held accountable to implementing AODA standards, Ontario education institutions must integrate AODA standards into teaching core curriculums, and business associations must be given support resources for small business AODA standards implementation.
Complacent attitudes toward socio-economic inclusion continues to be our primary barrier to equity and prosperity, and we cannot depend upon government to lead the way. So, disability advocates must take the lead in shifting attitudes from Accommodation to Integration, by working together in creating a network to promote inclusive education. Stop marketing disability and dependency on charity, and shift inspiration to social responsibility through education and accountability.
The intent of government regulated standards is to shape a more inclusive and healthy socio-economic society. However, if citizens to not buy into the values of the standard, then chaos will reign. This is the state of disability in Ontario on the eve of January 2025 goal of full inclusion. Educate yourself, and build a healthy business around the human right core principles, that will guarantee satisfied employees, loyal customers, increased return on investment, and a healthier community.
Taking Action
January 2025 will pass, but the painful reality of the AODA dilemma will remain. The solution is simple, ENFORCEMENT. Leaders of each provincial ministry must be educated and held accountable for their actions in building a more equitable and prosperous Ontario. Willful denial of the law should always have consequences. Very disappointing, but working together we can get Ontario back on track to be a more inclusive and competitive society.