Customer Service Standards Development Committee

Learn about the group that makes recommendations on how to improve existing customer service standards under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).

On this page Skip this page navigation

Background

In 2013, the Minister responsible for Accessibility established the Customer Service Standards Development Committee—a group of representatives from various sectors—including business, municipalities and people with disabilities, to make recommendations on our existing customer service standards.

Recommendations

The committee put forward initial proposed changes and asked for public feedback to help them draft their final proposed changes to the Minister Responsible for Accessibility.

The committee has reviewed all comments, finalized their proposal and submitted them to the Minister Responsible for Accessibility for consideration. Read the final proposed changes.

Regulatory changes

The amendments to the customer service standard are largely based on recommendations from the review of the committee.

Scope and timelines

Section 9 of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 informed the scope of the legislated review of the customer service standard. It required a standards development committee to:

re-examine the long-range objectives of the customer service standard
if required, revise the measures, policies, practices, and requirements to be implemented on or before January 1, 2025 and the timeframe for their implementation
develop another proposed standard containing modifications or additions that the committee deems advisable for public comment
make such changes it considers advisable to the proposed accessibility standard based on comments received and make recommendations to the minister

In addition, the minister asked the committee to consider recommendations in three key areas which were identified through research and stakeholder consultations. The priority areas were as follows:

service animal requirements
support persons requirements
opportunities to harmonize the requirements of the customer service standard with the requirements of the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation (IASR)

Key deliverables and timelines

The committee completed the following key deliverables.

Mandatory orientation and training – all members of the committee completed an initial orientation and training session committee work plan. The committee prepared and gave the minister a draft work plan to the committee.
Proposed recommendations for revisions to the standard – the committee delivered to the minister proposed recommendations for public review.
Finalizing recommendations for revisions to the standard – a report on comments received during the public review was prepared by the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility and the comments were given to the committee for its consideration. The committee considered public comments and made changes to the proposed revisions based on public comments. The committee submitted final recommendations for revisions to the standard to the minister along with a report on its consideration of public comments after receiving the report and public comments.
Meeting minutes and progress reports – following each of its meetings, the committee approved and provided the minister its meeting minutes which included a progress report on the review of the customer service standard

Meeting Minutes

Meeting 6: July 23 and 24, 2014
Meeting 5: June 25 and 26, 2014
Meeting 4: January 29 and 30, 2014
Meeting 3: December 4 and 5, 2013
Meeting 2: October 30 and 31, 2013
Meeting 1: September 11 and 12, 2013

Meeting 6: July 23 and 24, 2014

Letter from chair to the minister

September 12, 2014

The Honourable Brad Duguid
Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 6 – minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards Development Committee ("Committee"), I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 6 held on July 23 and 24, 2014 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress. The following key deliverables were completed at Meeting 6:

Reviewed and considered the public feedback received during the public comment period and made recommendations on the final three requirements of the Customer Service Standard;
Reviewed and revised the long-term objectives of the Customer Service Standard; and
Finalized the committee’s recommendations to government for a revised Customer Service Standard, and discussed the content of the transmittal letter to the Minister.

The committee looks forward to submitting its final recommendations to you in September.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Jim Sanders
Chair, Accessibility Standards Advisory Council / Standards Development Committee

Meeting information

July 23 and 24, 2014

777 Bay Street, 6^th Floor, Toronto, Boardrooms ABC

Day 1 present

Accessibility Standards Advisory Council / Standards Development Committee: Jim Sanders (Chair), Scott Allinson, Jane Arkell, David Best, Nuria Bronfman, Don Halpert (by teleconference), John Hendry, Debbie Kirwin, Dean Mellway, Stephen Murphy, Manon Poirier, Gary Rygus, Michelle Saunders (by teleconference on day 2), Dean Walker, Ann Hoy

Staff: Natalie Early, Nicole Dunn, Laura Adams, Graham Gerrell, Katherine Irwin, Jessica Brcko

Interpreters: Gus Mancini,Sean Power, Kerry Grandfield

Format of committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items.

Day 1 meeting minutes

M 6.1 Welcome and Chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks.
The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee approved the minutes from the June 25 and 26, 2014 meeting.

M 6.2 Preamble regarding class structure

As requested by the committee at Meeting 5, Natalie Early, the Manager of the Accessibility Policy Unit, presented draft language for a preamble to provide context for the committee’s recommended changes to the class structure section.
The committee agreed to include this preamble in the transmittal memo to the Minister that will accompany its final recommendations to government (See Appendix C for preamble excerpt).

Motion 6.1 Approve the proposed wording for the preamble.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 6.3 Feedback process

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the Committee’s proposed changes to Section 7 of the Customer Service Standard regarding feedback processes for providers of goods or services. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.2 Recommend the following:

The title of the section be changed to "Feedback Process on the Accessible Provision of Goods or Services."
The language on the channels and formats of an organization’s feedback process under the Customer Service Standard be matched with the language in the Information and Communications Standard which specifies that:
- Obligated organizations ensure that their feedback process is accessible to persons with disabilities by providing or arranging for the provision of accessible formats and communication supports upon request.
- Language be added that is similar to the language in the policies, practices and procedures section of the Customer Service Standard which states that when communicating with a person with a disability, a provider shall do so in a manner that takes into account the person’s disability.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 6.4 Support persons

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the Committee’s proposed changes to Section 4 of the Customer Service Standard regarding support persons. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.3 Recommend that additional language be added to clarify when an organization may require a support person to accompany a person with a disability for reasons of health and safety as follows:

This would only occur where, after consultation with the person with a disability, requiring a support person is the only means to allow the person to be on the premises and at the same time fulfill the provider’s obligation to protect the health and safety of the person with a disability and that of others (i.e., the health and safety risk cannot be eliminated or reduced by other means); and
Any considerations on protecting health and safety must be based on specific evidence and not on assumptions.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.4 Recommend the following wording be added to education materials regarding support person requirements:

Suggest as a best practice in educational materials that fees should be waived for support persons when an organization requires them as per section 4.5.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 6.5 Effective dates and implementation timelines

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the Committee’s proposed changes to Section 2 of the Customer Service Standard regarding effective dates and implementation timelines. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.5 Recommend the following regarding effective dates:

Where practical and applicable, the committee recommended that compliance dates align with the other accessibility standards with the provision of a grace period if required.
Delayed effective dates are recommended for all other recommendations with material changes to existing requirements to allow organizations time to comply.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Action M 6.1 As further background material, the Directorate was requested to provide a summary chart of implementation dates for all accessibility requirements for later in Day 1 of meeting.

M 6.6 Surcharge (new area)

Ms. Early presented the public feedback recommending that a new accessibility requirement be added to address the potential barrier of fees/surcharges being applied when accessing goods or services through certain channels but not others.
The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.6 Recommend that education materials encourage organizations to consider impacts of certain fees and if they can be waived to ensure equal opportunity to access goods and services.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 6.7 Review of long-term objectives

Ms. Early provided an overview of the long-term objectives of the Customer Service Standard.
The committee discussed potential revisions to the long-term objectives. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.7 Recommend that the long-term objectives of the Customer Service Standard be updated to include the term "facilities" as follows: "The long-term objective of the Customer

Service Standard is that persons or organizations providing goods, services and facilities (as defined in the purpose and application section proposed by the committee) in the Province of Ontario provide accessible customer service. The standard specifies requirements for achieving the long-term objective."

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Action M 6.2 The Directorate was requested to develop a draft definition of the term "facilities" for Day 2 of the meeting.

M 6.8 Transmittal memo topics

Ms. Early made a presentation on potential topics that the committee may wish to include in its transmittal memo to the Minister that will accompany its final recommendations. A discussion occurred. The committee agreed to continue the discussion on Day 2.

M 6.9 Education and enforcement update

Darren Cooney, Manager of the Public Education and Partnerships Unit, made a presentation to the committee which provided an update on the Directorate’s public education, outreach and compliance activities. A discussion ensued.

M 6.10 Day 1 wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 6.11 Chair remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks.

M 6.12 Transmittal memo topics – continued

The committee continued its discussion on topics that may be included in the transmittal memo to the Minister that will accompany its final recommendations.

Action M 6.3 The Directorate will circulate a draft of the transmittal memo based on the topics discussed for committee review/input and approval.

M 6.13 Review of final recommendations and final vote

Ms. Early presented a document containing all of the committee’s final recommended changes to the Customer Service Standard and supporting explanations, including a proposed definition of "facilities," which will form in part the package to be sent to the Minister. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 6.8 The proposed changes to the Customer Service Standard and the supporting explanations are ready to be submitted to the Minister for government consideration.

Motion carried - 14 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 6.14 Other comments

Following the completion of the review of the Standard, individual Committee members shared their personal comments and experiences about facing barriers to accessible customer service.
While the following comments do not reflect the collective views of the Committee, nor final recommendations from the Committee to the Minister, they are provided for information purposes.
It was suggested that the government continue to do more to remove physical barriers that may prevent or limit access to goods, services and facilities (e.g. stairs at the entrance to a business). While this issue falls within the scope of Ontario’s Building Meeting Minutes
July 23 and 24, 2014 Code and the Design of Public Spaces Standard, the government is encouraged to consider the importance of physical access in ensuring accessible customer service that addresses independence, dignity, integration and equality.
It was further suggested that government consider factors other than a specific threshold of number of employees when determining reporting requirements for organizations. For example, some Committee members felt that requiring all organizations, regardless of their type or size, to report on their compliance every two or three years through an online form was not an onerous administrative burden. The proposed class structure would still be used for documentation requirements.
It was thought that this approach may be an effective method to raise awareness of accessibility and remind organizations of their obligations under the Act. Other members expressed concern about the cumulative impact of additional reporting requirements for small businesses given the number of government ministries that have a role in regulating business in Ontario.

M 6.15 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Appendix A – Meeting 6 motions

Motion 6.1

Approve the proposed wording regarding class structure.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.2

Recommend the following:

The title of the section be changed to "Feedback Process on the Accessible Provision of Goods or Services."

The language on the channels and formats of an organization’s feedback process under the Customer Service Standard be matched with the language in the Information and Communications Standard which specifies that:
- Obligated organizations ensure that their feedback process is accessible to persons with disabilities by providing or arranging for the provision of accessible formats and communication supports upon request.
Language be added that is similar to the language in the policies, practices and procedures section of the Customer Service Standard which states that when communicating with a person with a disability, a provider shall do so in a manner that takes into account the person’s disability.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.3

Recommend that additional language be added to clarify when an organization may require a support person to accompany a person with a disability for reasons of health and safety as follows:
- This would only occur where, after consultation with the person with a disability, requiring a support person is the only means to allow the person to be on the premises and at the same time fulfill the provider’s obligation to protect the health and safety of the person with a disability and that of others (i.e., the health and safety risk cannot be eliminated or reduced by other means); and
- Any considerations on protecting health and safety must be based on specific evidence and not on assumptions.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.4

Recommend the following wording be added to education materials regarding support person requirements:

Suggest as a best practice in educational materials that fees should be waived for support persons when an organization requires them as per section 4.5.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.5

Recommend the following:

Where practical and applicable, the committee recommended that compliance dates align with the other accessibility standards with the provision of a grace period if required.
Delayed effective dates are recommended for all other recommendations with material changes to existing requirements to allow organizations time to comply.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.6

Recommend that education materials encourage organizations to consider impacts of certain fees and if they can be waived to ensure equal opportunity to access goods and services.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.7

Recommend that the long-term objectives of the Customer Service Standard be updated to include the term "facilities" as follows:
- "The long-term objective of the Customer Service Standard is that persons or organizations providing goods, services and facilities (as defined in the purpose and application section proposed by the committee) in the Province of Ontario provide accessible customer service. The standard specifies requirements for achieving the long-term objective."

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 6.8

The proposed changes to the Customer Service Standard and the supporting explanations are ready to be submitted to the Minister for government consideration.

Motion carried - 14 in favour, 0 opposed.

Appendix B – Meeting 6 action items

Day 1

Action M 6.1 As further background material, the Directorate was requested to provide a summary chart of implementation dates for all accessibility requirements for later in

Day 1 of meeting (completed - provided on Day 1 of meeting).

Action M 6.2 The Directorate was requested to draft a definition of the term "facilities" for Day 2 of the meeting (completed - provided at end of Day 1 of meeting).

Day 2

Action M 6.3 The Directorate will circulate a draft of the transmittal memo based on the topics discussed for committee review/input and approval.

Appendix C – Class structure preamble

The committee is recommending that the class structure for private/not-for-profit organizations under the Customer Service Standard be revised to match that of the other accessibility standards. This means that "small organizations" would be defined as those with fewer than 50 employees in Ontario instead of the current 20.

Given the thoughtful and sometimes difficult deliberations that went into this decision, members felt it appropriate to provide additional rationale to support our recommendation.

The committee carefully considered public feedback on this matter and is aware of the perception that this change would reduce the number of organizations that must comply with the Customer Service Standard. This is not the case. Organizations would continue to be required to comply with the accessibility requirements (i.e. to develop accessibility policies, and to provide accessible customer service). Organizations with 20 to 49 employees would no longer be required to document their policies. These organizations would continue to be subject to government audit, compliance and enforcement activities.

The committee considered the issue of documentation in the context of organizational resource effort and compliance. The committee concluded that public education and enforcement is the key to increased compliance. Analysis of compliance activities such as audits and compliance assistance indicates that organizations have come into compliance very quickly once they are aware of obligations, as opposed to a refusal to comply.

Based on the foregoing, public feedback, and the understanding that government will increase its public education efforts to increase compliance, the committee is of the opinion that accessible customer service goals could continue to be achieved if the class structure is changed to match the other accessibility standards. With this change, small organizations would be able to focus limited resources on delivering accessible customer service rather than preparing administrative documentation.

Meeting 5: June 25 and 26, 2014

Letter from chair to the minister

July 17, 2014

The Honourable Brad Duguid
Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 5 minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards Development Committee (ASAC/SDC), I would like to congratulate you on your recent appointment as the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. I look forward to meeting with you in the near future to discuss the work of ASAC/SDCand how the committee can continue to support you in advancing accessibility in Ontario.

ASAC/SDC is currently engaged in the legislative review of the Customer Service Standard (CS Standard). The committee began its work in September 2013. After deliberations over 4 meetings, the committee posted its initial recommendations for public comment in March 2014.

I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 5 held on June 25 and 26, 2014 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress. The following key deliverables were completed at Meeting 5:

Received an overview (statistics and trends) of the public feedback received during the public comment period (March 3 to May 22, 2014) on the committee’s initial proposed revisions to the CS Standard;
Reviewed and considered the public feedback on 8 of 11 CS Standard requirements and finalized recommendations on these requirements.

Looking ahead to Meeting 6 scheduled on July 23 and 24, 2014, the committee intends to:

Complete the public comment review and make recommendations on the final 3 requirements of the CS Standard;
Review the long term objectives of the CS Standard to determine whether revisions are required; and,
Finalize the recommendations for a revised CS Standard, and discuss the content of the transmittal letter to the Minister.

While meeting time has been set aside in August, it is the committee’s intent to complete its work on the CS Standard Review at the July meeting. The committee looks forward to submitting its final recommendations to you in late August.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Jim Sanders
Chair, ASAC/SDC

Meeting information

June 25 and 26, 2014

777 Bay Street, 6^th Floor, Toronto, Boardrooms ABC

Day 1 present

Accessibility Standards Advisory Council / Standards Development Committee: Jim Sanders (Chair), Scott Allinso, Jane Arkell, David Best, Nuria Bronfman, Don Halpert, John Hendry, Debbie Kirwin, Dean Mellway, Stephen Murphy, Manon Poirier, Gary Rygus (by teleconference on day 2), Michelle Saunders, Dean Walker, Ann Hoy

Staff: Natalie Early, Glen Padassery, Nicole Dunn, Laura Adams, Sarah Dunsford, Alf Spencer, Katherine Irwin

Interpreters: Day 1: Gus Mancini, Dana Feckovics and Sean Power, Day 2: Gus Mancini and Dana Feckovics,

Regrets: ASAC/SDC: Michelle Saunders (Day 1)

Format of committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items.

Day 1 meeting information

M 5.1 Welcome and chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks. The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee confirmed the minutes from the January 29 and 30, 2014 meeting.
Natalie Early, Manager, Accessibility Policy, presented an overview (statistics and trends) of the public comment period for the committee’s initial proposed revisions to the Customer Service (CS) Standard.
Glen Padassery, Director, Standards Policy and Compliance Branch, presented on the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 and the Human Rights Code.

Action M 5.1 As further background material, the ADO was requested to re-circulate a presentation made by the Ontario Human Rights Commission at the October 2013 meeting.

M 5.2 Confirmation of voting procedures

Ms. Early made a presentation on the voting procedures to approve final recommended changes to the CS Standard. A discussion ensued.
It was agreed that the numerical results of the votes will be recorded in the minutes.

M 5.3 Policies, practices and procedures

Mr. Padassery presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 3 of the CS Standard regarding policies, practices and procedures.
The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motions:

Motion 5.1 Recommend that government policy guidelines and education materials reference additional principles of accommodation identified through public feedback where appropriate.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 1 opposed.

Motion 5.2 Recommend that references to "policies, practices and procedures" throughout the Customer Service Standard be changed to match the term "policies" in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 5.4 Training

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 6 of the CS Standard regarding training for staff. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:
Motion 5.3 Recommend the requirements on who must be trained, and when training must be provided, be replaced with the following language:
Training must be provided to:
- All employees and volunteers;
- All people who participate in developing the organization’s policies; and
- All other people who provide goods, services or facilities on behalf of the organization.
Every person must be trained as soon as practicable.
Organizations must provide training on any changes to its accessibility policies on an ongoing basis.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 5.5 Service animals

Mr. Padassery presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 4 of the CS Standard regarding service animals. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 5.4 Recommend that the definition of service animal be changed as follows:

An animal would be defined as a service animal if:

the person provides third party certification that their service animal has been trained to provide assistance that relates to that person’s disability; or
it is "readily identifiable" that the animal is used by the person for reasons relating to their disability; or
the person provides documentation from a regulated health professional confirming that the person requires the animal for reasons relating to their disability.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 1 opposed.

M 5.6 Day 1 wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 2 meeting information

M 5.7 Chair remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks.

M 5.8 Notice of temporary disruptions

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 5 of the CS Standard regarding notice of temporary disruptions.
The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 5.5 The committee does not recommend any changes to the current requirements regarding notice of temporary disruptions in Section 5 of the Customer Service Standard.

Motion carried - 11 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 5.9 Class structure

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to the class structure within the CS Standard. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 5.6 Recommend that the class structure under the CS Standard be changed to match that of the other accessibility standards, as follows:

Private and not-for-profit organizations would be defined as having between 1 – 49 employees (small).
Private and not-for-profit organizations would be defined as having 50 or more employees (large).

Requirements under the CS Standard that applied to organizations with 20 or more employees would now apply to organizations with 50 or more employees.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 2 opposed.

Given the high level of collaboration by the committee to reach a decision on this matter, and the anticipated level of public interest on a recommendation on class structure, the committee asked that a preamble be prepared to accompany the committee’s class structure recommendation in the minutes to be discussed at the next meeting.

Action M5.2 For committee consideration at the meeting in July (Meeting 6), the ADO was requested to draft a preamble to accompany the committee’s recommendation on class structure.

M 5.10 Notice of availability of documents and format of documents

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 8 of CS Standard regarding notice of availability of documents and Section 9 regarding format of documents. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 5.7 Recommend that:

An organization be required to provide accessible formats and communication supports upon request to a person with a disability. These must be provided in a timely manner and at a cost that is no more than the regular cost charged.
The current provision that organizations and people with disabilities "agree upon" an accessible format be replaced with the following requirement:
- Organizations must consult with the person making the request to determine the suitability of an accessible format or communication support.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 5.11 Purpose and application

Ms. Early presented the public feedback received on the ASAC/SDC’s proposed changes to Section 1 of the CS Standard regarding its purpose and application. The committee discussed the issues raised in the public feedback and voted on the following motion:

Motion 5.8 Recommend that:

The types and definitions of obligated organizations under the CS Standard be matched with those of other accessibility standards as follows:
- designated public sector organization
- Government of Ontario
- large designated public sector organization
- large organization
- Legislative Assembly
- small designated public sector organization
- small organization

"Facilities" be included throughout the CS Standard (i.e. "provision of goods, services and facilities").

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 5.12 Guidance from committee on other issues and recommendations

d/ channel is an accommodation for their disability.
In addition, the committee agreed to discuss issues related to compliance and public education at Meeting 6.
Action M 5.3 Ms. Early presented an overview of the public feedback received that was not directly related to the requirements in the CS Standard or the committee’s proposed changes.
The committee agreed to consider at Meeting 6 the recommendation in public feedback to prohibit any added fee or surcharge for customers with disabilities when they order goods or services using a specific service method/ channel (e.g. ordering a good or service over the phone rather than on the internet) and that service methoThe ADO was requested to provide an inter-provincial scan on developments regarding accessibility across Canada for Meeting 6.

M 5.13 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Appendix A – Meeting 5 motions

Motion 5.1

Recommend that government policy guidelines and education materials reference additional principles of accommodation identified through public feedback where appropriate.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 5.2

Recommend that references to "policies, practices and procedures" throughout the Customer Service Standard be changed to match the term "policies" in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 5.3

Recommend the requirements on who must be trained and when training must be provided be replaced with the following language:

Training must be provided to:
- All employees, and volunteers;
- All people who participate in developing the organization’s policies; and
- All other people who provide goods, services or facilities on behalf of the organization.
Every person must be trained as soon as practicable.
Organizations must provide training on any changes to its accessibility policies on an ongoing basis.

Motion carried - 13 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 5.4

Recommend that the definition of service animal be changed as follows:

An animal would be defined as a service animal if:

the person provides third party certification that their service animal has been trained to provide assistance that relates to that person’s disability; or
it is "readily identifiable" that the animal is used by the person for reasons relating to their disability; or
the person provides documentation from a regulated health professional confirming that the person requires the animal for reasons relating to their disability.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 1 opposed.

Motion 5.5

The committee does not recommend any changes to the current requirements regarding notice of temporary disruptions in Section 5 of the Customer Service Standard.

Motion carried - 11 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 5.6

Recommend that the class structure under the CS Standard be changed to match that of the other accessibility standards, as follows:

Private and not-for-profit organizations would be defined as having between 1-49 employees (small).
Private and not-for-profit organizations would be defined as having 50 or more employees (large).

Requirements under the CS Standard that applied to organizations with 20 or more employees would now apply to organizations with 50 or more employees.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 2 opposed.

Motion 5.7

Recommend that:

An organization be required to provide accessible formats and communication supports upon request to a person with a disability. These must be provided in a timely manner and at a cost that is no more than the regular cost charged.
The current provision that organizations and people with disabilities "agree upon" an accessible format be replaced with the following requirement:
- Organizations must consult with the person making the request to determine the suitability of an accessible format or communication support.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

Motion 5.8

Recommend that:

The types and definitions of obligated organizations under the CS Standard be matched with those of other accessibility standards as follows:
- designated public sector organization
- Government of Ontario
- large designated public sector organization
- large organization
- Legislative Assembly
- small designated public sector organization
- small organization
"Facilities" be included throughout the CS Standard (i.e. "provision of goods, services and facilities").

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

Appendix B – Meeting 5 action items

Day 1

Action M5.1 As further background material, the ADO was requested to re-circulate a presentation made by the Ontario Human Rights Commission at the October 2013 meeting.

Day 2

Action M 5.2 For committee consideration at the meeting in July (Meeting 6), the ADO was requested to draft a preamble to accompany the committee’s recommendation on class structure that would be included in the final recommendations for the Minister.

Action M 5.3 The ADO was requested to provide an inter-provincial scan on developments regarding accessibility across Canada for Meeting 6.

Meeting 4: January 29 and 30, 2014

Letter from chair to the minister

March 11, 2014

The Honourable Eric Hoskins
Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 4 – minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards

Development Committee (ASAC/SDC), I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 4 held on January 29 and 30, 2014 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress.

Further to progress reports from Meetings 1, 2 and 3, the committee has completed the following key deliverables:

Completed the general review of the Customer Service Standard requirements; and
Approved the initial proposed revisions to the Customer Service Standard for posting for public comment.

Looking ahead to Meeting 5, tentatively scheduled on May 27 and 28, 2014, the committee intends to review and consider the public comments received during the 45 day public comment period (March 3 to April 16, 2014). The committee looks forward to submitting its final recommendations to you in late June.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Jim Sanders
Chair, ASAC/SDC

Meeting information

January 29 and 30, 2014

777 Bay Street, 6^th Floor, Toronto, Boardrooms ABC

Day 1 present

Staff: Natalie Early, Glen Padassery, Laura Adams, Sarah Dunsford

Interpreters: Penny Schincariol, Angi Tippet, Kerry Grandfield

Regrets: Scott Allinson (Day 2), Don Halpert (Day 2)

Format of Committee Minutes and References: For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items.

Day 1 meeting minutes

M 4.1 Welcome and Chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks.
The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee confirmed the minutes from the December 4 and 5, 2013 meeting and reviewed the action items from this meeting.
Natalie Early, Manager, Accessibility Policy, presented a document summarizing the voting process to approve the proposed revisions to the Customer Service (CS) Standard for public comment. A discussion ensued.

Action M 4.1 The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (ADO) was requested to clarify past voting practices by previous Standards Development Committees and the format of the recorded vote for information on Day 2 of the meeting.

M 4.2 Section 8 - Notice of availability of documents and Section 9 - Format of documents

Ms. Early presented an overview of Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motions:

Motion 4.1 Amend the current provisions of Sections 8 and 9 under the CS Standard.

Motion carried

Motion 4.2 Expand the scope of Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard to include any information and communication that an organization provides to the public, not just documents required under the CS Standard.

Motion carried

Motion 4.3 Modify Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard to require communication supports to be provided in addition to accessible formats.

Motion carried

Motion 4.4 Modify Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard to replace the phrase "The provider of goods or services and the person with a disability may agree upon the format to be used for the document or information" with "The obligated organization shall consult with the person making the request in determining the suitability of an accessible format or communication support."

Motion carried

Motion 4.5 Modify Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard to specify that the accessible format must be provided at no more than the regular cost charged to others and in a timely manner.

Motion carried

Action M 4.2 The ADO was requested to provide options for adding language to the CS Standard to indicate the application of "reasonability"/ "practicability" in the context of meeting requirements after the morning break on Day 1 of the meeting.

Action M 4.3 The ADO was requested to provide members with the website address for the review of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 being conducted by Dean Mayo Moran.

Ms. Early presented options for adding language to the CS Standard to indicate the application of "reasonability"/ "practicability" in the context of meeting requirements. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 4.6 Recommend that government add language to the general provisions of the CS Standard regarding the application of "reasonability" / "practicability" in the context of meeting requirements of the Standard.

Motion carried

M 4.3 Review and approval of proposals for public comment

Ms. Early presented the Proposed Revised Customer Service Standard document for posting for public comment which summarizes the committee’s proposed revisions to the CS Standard and supporting explanations.
A discussion ensued.

Action M 4.4 The ADO was requested to amend the Proposed Revised Customer Service Standard for Day 2 of the meeting as follows:

Amend the explanation for the proposed change to the definition of service animals where "readily apparent" and "readily identifiable" had been incorrectly reversed;
Amend the proposed revision to the definition of service animals to clearly indicate the committee’s intent that all service animals must be trained;
Include a footnote or notation to clearly indicate to the reader when a proposed revision to one section of the CS Standard (e.g. class structure) applies to other sections throughout the document; and
Incorporate the committee’s decisions from Day 1 regarding Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard.

M 4.4 Review and approval of proposed feedback form

Ms. Early presented the proposed Feedback Form for members of the public and organizations to use in order to provide comments on the initial proposed revised CS Standard.
A discussion ensued.

Action M 4.5 The ADO was requested to revise the Feedback Form before the launch of the public comment period as follows (subject to government privacy, legal, and technical considerations):

Use an older version of Microsoft Word to ensure it is accessible for certain screen readers;
Include an option for people to disagree with a proposed change and provide an explanation, in addition to the option to disagree and provide a suggestion for a different change;
Clearly state in the instructions section that it is not necessary to respond to all questions;
Include separate comment boxes after each option for agreeing or disagreeing on the proposed changes, rather than one comment box for all options;
Remove options for respondents to write a question (in addition to or instead of a comment) on the proposed changes; and
Include optional questions requesting the name and contact information of the individual or organization.

Action M 4.6 The ADO was requested to include the following items in its plan to launch the public comment period:

Confirm whether the public comment period would be for 45 calendar days or business days;
Request partners to help communicate to their members when the public comment period is open;
Provide committee members with an updated version of the Feedback Form before the launch of the public comment period;
Work with committee members to ensure the accessibility of the Feedback Form; and,
Provide committee members with the dates of the 45-day public comment period once confirmed.

M 4.5 Review of parking lot items

Ms. Early presented a list of parking lot items based on the previous meetings. A discussion ensued. The committee identified items to carry forward to Meeting 5.

M 4.6 Day 1 wrap-up

Alyson Rowe of the Minister’s Office, Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Employment, joined the ASAC/SDC for introductions and a brief discussion.Day 1 meeting minutes

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 4.7 Chair remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks.
The committee discussed the tentative dates for Meeting 5.

M 4.8 Continuation of discussions from day 1

Feedback form:

Ms. Early presented the action items regarding the Feedback Form from Day 1. A discussion ensued.

The committee added the following item to the list of revisions to the Feedback Form (Action M 4.5):

Add an explanation that all personal information requested would be used for analytical purposes only.

Proposed revised Customer Service Standard:

Ms. Early presented the updated Proposed Revised Customer Service Standard document which incorporated the committee’s revisions and decisions from Day 1. A discussion ensued.

Voting procedures:

Ms. Early confirmed the voting procedures to approve the proposed revisions to the CS Standard for public comment. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 4.7 The proposed changes to the Customer Service Standard and the supporting explanations are ready for public comment.

Motion carried - 12 in favour, 0 opposed.

M 4.9 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Appendix A – Meeting 4 action items

Day 1

The ADO is to do the following:

Action M 4.1 Clarify past voting practices by previous Standards Development Committees and the format of the recorded vote for information on Day 2 of the meeting (completed – provided on Day 2 of meeting).
Action M 4.2 Provide options for adding language to the CS Standard to indicate the application of "reasonability"/ "practicability" in the context of meeting requirements after the morning break on Day 1 of the meeting (completed – provided after the morning break of Day 1 of meeting).
Action M 4.3 Provide members with the website address for the review of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 being conducted by Dean Mayo Moran (completed – provided on Day 1 of the meeting).

Action M 4.4 Amend the Proposed Revised Customer Service Standard for Day 2 of the meeting as follows:

Amend the explanation for the proposed change to the definition of service animals where "readily apparent" and "readily identifiable" had been incorrectly reversed;
Amend the proposed revision to the definition of service animals to clearly indicate the committee’s intent that all service animals must be trained;
Include a footnote or notation to clearly indicate to the reader when a proposed revision to one section of the CS Standard (e.g. class structure) applies to other sections throughout the document; and
Incorporate the committee’s decisions from Day 1 regarding Sections 8 and 9 of the CS Standard (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting).

Action M 4.5 Revise the Feedback Form before the launch of the public comment period as follows (subject to government privacy, legal, and technical considerations):

Use an older version of Microsoft Word to ensure it is accessible for certain screen readers;
Include an option for people to disagree with a proposed change and provide an explanation, in addition to the option to disagree and provide a suggestion for a different change;
Clearly state in the instructions section that it is not necessary to respond to all questions;
Include separate comment boxes after each option for agreeing or disagreeing on the proposed changes, rather than one comment box for all options;
Remove options for respondents to write a question (in addition to or instead of a comment) on the proposed changes;
Include optional questions requesting the name and contact information of the individual or organization; and
Add an explanation that all personal information requested would be used for analytical purposes only (added to Action M4.5 on Day 2 of meeting).

Action M 4.6 Include the following items in its plan to launch the public comment period:

Confirm whether the public comment period would be for 45 calendar days or business days (completed – confirmed on Day 1 of meeting);
Request partners to help communicate to their members when the public comment period is open;
Provide committee members with an updated version of the Feedback Form before the launch of the public comment period;
Work with committee members to ensure the accessibility of the Feedback Form; and,
Provide committee members with the dates of the 45-day public comment period once confirmed.

Meeting 3: December 4 and 5, 2013

Letter from chair to the minister

December 18, 2013

The Honourable Eric Hoskins
Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 3 minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards Development Committee (ASAC/SDC), I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 3 held on December 4 and 5, 2013 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress.

Further to the progress reports from Meetings 1 and 2, the committee has completed the following key deliverables:

Examined potential eligibility criteria for identifying support persons;
Reviewed and determined whether the support person requirement that allows organizations to require the use of a support person should be amended; and,
Conducted a general review of the other Customer Service (CS) Standard requirements.

Looking ahead to Meeting 4 on January 29 and 30, 2014, the committee intends to finish the general review of the other CS Standard requirements and to vote on initial recommendations for posting for public comment.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Jim Sanders
Chair, ASAC/SDC

Meeting information

December 4 and 5, 2013

777 Bay Street, 6^th Floor, Toronto, Boardrooms ABC

Day 1 present

ASAC/SDC: Jim Sanders (Chair), Jane Arkell, David Best, Nuria Bronfman, Don Halpert, John Hendry, Debbie Kirwin, Dean Mellway, Stephen Murphy, Manon Poirier, Gary Rygus, Dean Walker, Ann Hoy

Staff: Natalie Early, Glen Padassery, Maria Edwards, Nicole Dunn

Presenters: Brian Chan (Easter Seals Canada)

Interpreters: Day 1: Angi Tippet, Gus Mancini and Dana Feckovics, Day 2: Heather Hawthorn, Gus Mancini and Dana Feckovics

Regrets: Scott Allinson, Michelle Saunders, Gary Rygus (Day 1)

Format of committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items.

Day 1 meeting information

M 3.1 Welcome and Chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks.
The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee confirmed the minutes from the October 30 and 31, 2013 meeting and reviewed the action items from this meeting.

M 3.2 Presentation on the access 2 Entertainment Program

Brian Chan, National Programs Manager at Easter Seals Canada, provided an overview of the Access 2 Entertainment program for people with disabilities who require the assistance of a support person when visiting ticketed attractions and entertainment venues. The presentation included the program’s history, partners, participating venues, application process, and feedback received from program participants.

M 3.3 Support persons background and context

Natalie Early, Manager, Accessibility Policy, provided background and context for the discussion on support persons including Customer Service (CS) Standard intent, interjurisdictional and legislative context, and feedback from stakeholders.

M 3.4 Definition of support persons

Ms. Early presented an options paper on refining the definition of support persons. A discussion ensued. No revisions were proposed.

M 3.5 Clarifying organization policies on support persons

Ms. Early presented an options paper on clarifying organization policies on support persons. A discussion ensued.
The committee agreed to continue a discussion on what businesses may request to demonstrate proof of a need for a support person (ie. ID card) on Day 2 of the meeting.

M 3.6 Section 4.5

Ms. Early presented an options paper on section 4.5 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued.

Action M3.1 The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (ADO) was requested to provide an example of clarifying language for modifying section 4.5 of the CS Standard for Day 2 of the meeting.

M 3.7 Day 1 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Action M 3.2 The ADO was requested to provide the committee with a discussion summary of Day 1 for Day 2 of the meeting.

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 3.8 Chair remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks.

The committee reviewed the action items from Day 1 of the meeting. As requested by the committee Ms. Early provided a summary of the Day 1 discussion and an example of clarifying language for modifying section 4.5 of the CS Standard.

M 3.9 General review of the other Customer Service Standard requirements

The committee agreed that of the 11 sections under the CS Standard, sections 1, 2, and 4 had been reviewed as part of deliberations in meetings 1 and 2 and that sections 10 and 11 are out of scope for the purpose of the general review. The committee reviewed the remaining six sections.

M 3.9.1 Section 3 – Establishment of policies, practices and procedures

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 3 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 3.1 Maintain the current CS Standard requirements on policies, practices and procedures.

Motion carried

M 3.9.2 Section 5 – Notice of temporary disruptions

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 5 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 3.2 Maintain the current CS Standard requirements on notice of temporary disruptions.

Motion carried

M 3.9.3 Section 6 – Training for staff

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 6 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 3.3 Maintain the current CS Standard requirements on training for staff.

Motion carried

M 3.9.4 Section 7 – Feedback process

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 7 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motions:

Motion 3.4 Match the language on the channels and formats of an organization’s feedback process with the language in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried

Motion 3.5 Include a clear link to the section 3.4 requirement to communicate in a manner that takes into account a person’s disability.

Motion carried

Motion 3.6 Modify the title of the section to "Feedback process on the accessibility to provision of goods or services."

Motion carried

M 3.9.5 Section 8 – Notice of availability of documents

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 8 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members agreed to defer the discussion to Meeting 4.

M 3.9.6 Section 9 – Format of documents

Ms. Early presented an overview of section 9 of the CS Standard. A discussion ensued. Members agreed to defer the discussion to Meeting 4.

M 3.10 Vote on motions

Based on the foregoing discussion on items brought forward from Day 1 of the meeting, the committee voted on the following motions on support persons:

Motion 3.7 Maintain the current definition of support persons under the CS Standard.

Motion carried

Motion 3.8 Modify the current section 4.5 requirement under the CS Standard to add the following:

This would only occur where, after consultation with the person with a disability, requiring a support person is the only means to allow the person to be on the premises and at the same time fulfill the provider’s obligation to protect the health and safety of the person with a disability and that of others (i.e., the health and safety risk cannot be eliminated or reduced by other means).
Any considerations on protecting health and safety must be based on specific evidence and not on assumptions.

Motion carried

M 3.11 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Action M 3.3 The ADO was requested to update the track changes summary provided at prior meetings incorporating the committee recommendations from this meeting.

Action M 3.4 The ADO was requested to provide consolidated and finalized initial recommendations for a formal vote at the next meeting.

Appendix A – Meeting 4 action items

Day 1

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:
- Action M3.1 An example of clarifying language for modifying section 4.5 of the CS Standard (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting).
- Action M3.2: A discussion summary for Day 1 of the meeting (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting).

Day 2

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:
- Action M3.3 An update to the track changes summary provided at prior meetings incorporating the committee recommendations from this meeting.
- Action M3.4 Consolidated and finalized initial recommendations for a formal vote at the next meeting.

Meeting 2: October 30 and 31, 2013

Letter from chair to the minister

November 12, 2013

The Honourable Eric Hoskins
Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 2 – minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards Development Committee (ASAC/SDC), I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 2 held on October 30 and 31, 2013 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress.

Further to the progress report from Meeting 1, the committee has completed the following key deliverables:

Examined service animal requirements, including the definition and potential training requirements for service animals; and,
Finalized the draft workplan, outlining key milestones, activities, and timelines (copy attached).

Looking ahead to Meeting 3 on December 4 and 5, 2013, the committee intends to discuss the priority area of support person requirements and other requirements of the Customer Service Standard.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Jim Sanders
Chair, ASAC/SDC

Meeting information

October 30 and 31, 2013

777 Bay Street, 6^th Floor, Toronto, Boardrooms ABC

Day 1 present

ASAC/SDC: Jim Sanders (Chair), Scott Allinson, Jane Arkell, David Best, Nuria Bronfman, Don Halpert, John Hendry, Debbie Kirwin, Dean Mellway, Stephen Murphy, Manon Poirier, Gary Rygus, Michelle Saunders, Dean Walker, Ann Hoy

Staff: Natalie Early, Glen Padassery, Alf Spencer, Maria Edwards

Presenters: Sandy Turney and Tim Rose (Lions Foundation of Canada Dog Guides), Jeff Poirier (Ontario Human Rights Commission), Mayo Moran (Faculty of Law, University of Toronto),

Interpreters: Bonnie-Lyn Barker, Sean Power (Day 1), Tala Jalili (Day 1), Penny Schincariol (Day 2), Angi Tippett (Day 2)

Regrets: Scott Allinson (Day 1)

Format of committee minutes and references:
For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items.

Day 1 meeting minutes

M 2.1 Welcome and Chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks.
The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee approved the minutes from the September 11 and 12, 2013 meeting and reviewed the action items from this meeting.

M 2.2 Service animals training

Sandy Turney, Executive Director, Lions Foundation of Canada Dog Guides, provided an overview on service dog training programs, a scan of the industry in Canada and abroad, and her perspective on the training of other service animals.

M 2.3 Experience of a service animal client

Tim Rose, accompanied by his service dog, Rush, shared his experience as a service animal client. Both Mr. Rose and his service dog completed training through the Lions Foundation of Canada Dog Guides program.

M 2.4 Service animals and the Ontario Human Rights Code

Jeff Poirier, Senior Policy Analyst, Policy, Education, Monitoring and Outreach at the Ontario Human Rights Commission provided an overview on the Ontario human rights system, the relationship between the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005and highlighted human rights cases relating to service animals.

M 2.5 Reflections from morning presentations

Members discussed their reflections on the morning presentations by the guest speakers.

M2.6 Service animals background and context

Natalie Early, Manager, Accessibility Policy, provided background and context for the discussion on service animals, including Customer Service (CS) Standard intent, interjurisdictional and legislative context, feedback from stakeholders, and current events.

Action M 2.1 The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (ADO) was requested to provide the committee with Manitoba’s guidelines on service animals.

M 2.7 Definition of service animals

Ms. Early presented an options paper on refining the definition of service animals. A discussion ensued.

Action M 2.2 The ADO was requested to provide the committee with a discussion summary for Day 1 of the meeting.

M 2.8 Day 1 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 2.9 Chair remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks. The committee reviewed the action items from Day 1 of the meeting.

M 2.10 Decisions on service animals

M 2.10.1 Decision on Definition of Service Animals

The committee continued its discussion on the definition of service animals that began on Day 1 of the meeting. Members voted on the following motions:

Motion 2.1 Maintain the current definition of service animals under the CS Standard (i.e., a guide dog or other service animal).

Motion carried

Motion 2.2 Amend the term "readily apparent" to "readily identifiable."

Motion carried

Motion 2.3 Amend the requirement to provide a letter from "a physician or nurse" to a letter from a "regulated health professional."

Motion carried

Motion 2.4 Government to develop frequently asked questions to help organizations better identify service animals and provide further detail through guidelines (or other means) that service animals are not pets.

Motion carried

M 2.10.2 Decision on training requirements for service animals

Ms. Early presented an options paper on refining the training requirements for service animals. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 2.5 Clarify that service animals are trained to provide assistance to a person with a disability that relates to that person’s disability.

Motion carried

M 2.11 Clarification of scope for public consultation

As a follow-up to the discussion at Meeting 1, Ms. Early provided clarification on the scope for the posting and request for public comment on the committee’s recommendations to the minister.

M 2.12 Track changes of committee recommendations to date

At the request of the committee, and for illustrative purposes only, Ms. Early provided a track changes version of the CS Standard prepared by staff incorporating the committee’s recommendations from Meeting 1.

Action M 2.3 The ADO was requested to continue to provide the committee with a track changes version of the CS Standard incorporating the committee’s recommendations from each meeting.

M 2.13 Revised draft workplan

The committee reviewed the revised workplan prepared by staff. A discussion ensued. Members approved the draft workplan without revision and recommended that it be submitted to the minister as required in the minister’s mandate letter.

M 2.14 Guest speaker – Mayo Moran

Mayo Moran, Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto and recently appointed reviewer of the AODA, joined the committee in camera over lunch and provided remarks.

M 2.15 Wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.
The committee set tentative dates for the meeting in May (May 27 and 28, 2014), which are subject to change depending on the public posting period for the committee’s initial recommendations to the minister.

Appendix A – Meeting 2 action items

Day 1

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:

Action M 2.1 Manitoba’s guidelines on service animals (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting).
Action M 2.2 A discussion summary for Day 1 of the meeting (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting).

Day 2

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:

Action M 2.3 Track changes version of the CS Standard incorporating the committee’s recommendations from each meeting.

Meeting 1: September 11 and 12, 2013

Letter from chair to the minister

September 30, 2013

The Honourable Eric Hoskins
Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment
8^th Floor, Hearst Block, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: Customer Service Standard review meeting 1 – minutes and progress report

On behalf of the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council/Standards Development Committee (ASAC/SDC), I am pleased to submit the committee approved minutes of Meeting 1 held on September 11 and 12, 2013 and to provide you with a brief update on the committee’s progress.

The committee has completed the following key deliverables:

Completed an initial orientation and training session;
Developed a draft workplan to be finalized at Meeting 2;
Reviewed the long-range objectives of the Customer Service Standard; and
Identified Customer Service Standard requirements which are similar to those outlined in the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation (IASR) and suggested ways to harmonize these requirements with the IASR to further streamline accessibility standards, simplify compliance, and reduce regulatory burden on business.

Looking ahead to Meeting 2 on October 3 and 4, 2013, the committee intends to discuss the priority area of service animal requirements.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Jim Sanders
Chair, ASAC/SDC

Meeting information

September 11 and 12, 2013

250 Yonge Street, 35^th Floor, Toronto, Collaboration Boardroom

Day 1 present:

Staff: Natalie Early, Glen Padassery, Alf Spencer (Day 1 morning), Maria Edwards

Presenters: Sarah Kong (Global Knowledge Inc.), David Lepofsky (AODA Alliance)

Interpreters: Penny Schincariol, Bonnie - Lynn Baker, Kerry Grandfield (Day 1), Angi Tippet (Day 2)

Regrets: Scott Allinson (Day 2 afternoon)

Format of Committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing committee documents and items in the minutes: M represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items

Day 1 meeting minutes

M 1.1 Welcome and Chair remarks

The Chair provided greetings and opening remarks which included acknowledgement of the recent appointment of Mayo Moran, Dean and James Marshall Tory Professor of Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, to lead the review of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005.
The committee reviewed and approved the agenda.
The committee approved the ASAC minutes from the July 10 and 11, 2013 orientation session and reviewed the action items from this meeting.
The Chair confirmed the voting procedures.

M 1.2 Long-term objectives of the Customer Service Standard

Natalie Early, Manager of Accessibility Policy, provided an overview of the long-term objectives of the Customer Service (CS) Standard.
A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.1 Maintain the current long-term objectives of the CS Standard to guide the review of the CS Standard, but revisit these objectives at the end of the review to ensure their continued alignment with the committee’s proposed recommendations.

Motion carried

Action M 1.1 The ADO was requested to provide the committee with the long-term objectives of the other four accessibility standards.

M 1.3 Approach to integration

Ms. Early provided an overview of integration. This is the process of examining the requirements of the CS Standard with the requirements of the other four accessibility standards and to look for opportunities to align, where appropriate. The committee reached a consensus on the scope and options for integration. It was noted that the discussion on new and/or enhanced CS Standard requirements would be a separate discussion later in the review of the CS Standard. The committee also agreed on the following guidelines for recommendations on integration:

Will not conflict with the long-term objectives of the CS Standard.
Will reduce the inconsistencies of CS Standard requirements with the other accessibility standards.
Will maintain or enhance the current level of accessibility.
Will be based on the evidence currently available.
Will simplify requirements for obligated organizations.

The guidelines have not been ranked and the committee will consider all five in reaching a recommendation.

M 1.4 Decisions on integration

M.1.4.1 Decision on administrative changes

Ms. Early provided an overview on administrative changes which are CS Standard requirements that do not have a parallel or complementary requirement in the IASR. A discussion ensued.

Action M 1.2 The ADO is to provide the committee with further analysis on compliance and accessibility reporting, format of documents, notice of availability of documents and temporary disruptions requirements in support of discussion on Day 2 of the meeting.

M 1.4.2 Decision on class structure

Ms. Early provided an overview of the options for integration of class structure requirements. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion M 1.2 Match the CS Standard class structure with the class structure of the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried

M 1.4.3 Decision on feedback

Ms. Early provided the committee with an overview on the integration of feedback requirements. A discussion ensued. Members agreed to defer the discussion to Day 2 of the meeting.

M 1.4.4 Decision on policies, practices and procedures

Ms. Early provided an overview of the options for integration of the requirement on policies, practices and procedures.
A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion M 1.3 Match "policies, practices and procedures" with the term "policies" used in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried

M 1.4.5 Decision on training

Ms. Early provided an overview of the options for integration of training requirements. A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motions:

Motion M1.4 Match the language on who must be trained with the language in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried

Motion M1.5 Match the language on when training must occur with the language in the other accessibility standards.

Motion carried

M 1.5 Day 1 wrap-up

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 1.6 Opening remarks

The Chair provided opening remarks.
The committee reviewed the action items from Day 1 of the meeting.

M 1.7 Decisions on integration

M 1.7.1 Decision on compliance and accessibility reporting

Glen Padassery, Director of Standards, Policy and Compliance, provided an overview of the compliance and accessibility reporting requirements of the AODA and the CS Standard. A discussion ensued on whether review of these sections is within scope. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.6 The accessibility reporting requirements as established in the CS Standard are out of scope for the CS Standard Review.

Motion carried

M 1.7.2 Decision on temporary disruptions

Ms. Early provided the committee with an overview on the integration of temporary disruption requirements.
A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.7 Maintain the temporary disruption requirements as established in the CS Standard.

Motion carried

M 1.7.3 Decision on format of documents and notice of availability of documents

Ms. Early provided the committee with an overview on the integration of format of documents and notice of availability of documents requirements.
A discussion ensued. Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.8 Maintain the format of documents and notice of availability of documents requirements as established in the CS Standard.

Motion carried

M 1.7.4 Decision on feedback

The committee continued the discussion on integration of feedback requirements that began on Day 1 of the meeting.
Members voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.9 Maintain the feedback requirements as established in the CS Standard.

Motion carried

M 1.7.5 Decision on administrative changes

Based on the foregoing discussion on items brought forward from Day 1 of the meeting and follow-up analysis and presentations from staff, the committee voted on the following motion:

Motion 1.10 It is recommended that the following seven requirements form the CS Standard under the IASR through legislative drafting. The committee reserves the right to revisit these requirements as part of the CS Standard Review at a later date.

Purpose and application (with the exception of class structure)
Effective dates
Service animals and support persons
Notice of temporary disruptions
Feedback
Notice of availability of documents
Format of documents

Motion carried

M 1.8 Guest speaker – David Lepofsky

David Lepofsky, Chair of the AODA Alliance, joined the committee over lunch and provided remarks.
Mr. Lepofsky kindly agreed to provide the committee with a recording of his remarks.

M 1.9 Sharepoint training

Sarah Kong of Global Knowledge Inc. provided the committee members with training on the use of SharePoint to access future meeting materials.

M 1.10 Workplan

The committee reviewed the draft workplan prepared by staff. Staff will update the workplan based on the committee discussion.

Action M 1.3 The ADO is to provide the committee with an updated workplan to be considered at the next meeting.

M 1.11 Wrap-up

The committee confirmed the dates for the next three meetings:
- October 30 and 31, 2013
- December 4 and 5, 2013
- January 29 and 30, 2014

The Chair provided closing remarks.

Action M 1.4 The ADO was requested to provide the committee with materials to inform the discussion on the public review and public consultation processes.

Action M 1.5 The ADO was requested to provide the committee with a track changes version of the CS Standard incorporating the committee’s recommendations at the meeting.

Action M 1.6 The ADO was requested to provide information on what accessible formats were made available during the public comment period for the initial proposed CS Standard.

Action M 1.7 The ADO was requested provide a policy on per diems.

Appendix A – M eeting 1 action items

Day 1

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:

Action M 1.1 The long-term objectives of the other four accessibility standards (completed –provided on Day 2 of the meeting, with the exception of the long-term objectives for the Design of Public Spaces Standard)
Action M 1.2 Analysis on compliance and accessibility reporting, format of documents, notice of availability of documents and temporary disruptions (completed – provided on Day 2 of the meeting)

Day 2

The ADO is to provide the committee members with the following:

Action M 1.3 Updated workplan to be considered at the next meeting
Action M 1.4 Materials to inform the discussion on the public review and public consultation processes
Action M 1.5 Track changes version of the CS Standard incorporating the committee’s recommendations at the meeting
Action M 1.6 Information on what accessible formats were made available during the public comment period for the initial proposed CS Standard
Action M 1.7 Policy on per diems

Updated: June 29, 2022

Published: March 04, 2021