Aibu to want ds to travel for free on the bus?

[BeyondWithTwoToddlers]

Mentioned this in a related thread earlier, but thought i'd run it by aibu.

I have a free bus pass as am disabled. However, because it doesnt count as a "full fare paying adult", I have to pay for my toddler on the bus, who would be free if i was paying normal adult fare for myself.

I'm a bit miffed about it, a bus pass is provided for me as the council understands I cant walk from a to b, but i still cant get infinite buses as i do still have to pay for ds. I'm not saying he should be free full stop by the way, just that as an adult, my pass should count as an adult fare. Seems to be yet another case of disabled parents not being thought of when plans are made for accessiblity. (Gatwick airport, i'm looking at you!)

Are they being unreasonable? Or should i just forget about it.

This is unfair. Your toddler DS should not have to pay if he would normally travel free with a fare paying adult.

I have an email from the ops manager asking me to visit the depot for a meeting. DH thinks I'm being stupid to be annoyed about that, that I should go and put my point across. I think that I shouldnt have to, visiting is a huge inconvienience for me, and no doubt they arent planning to change anything, just want to patronisinly explain to me how they have to charge because they need to make money.

I am not disabled but I am pensionable age so have a free bus pass. I have taken my 4 year old grandson on the bus without paying for him. Is it a rule of the particular bus company.I must admit I expected to pay for him, but was told he could travel free so neither of us pay.It isn't fair that you should pay for a toddler.

I agree, Beyond, you shouldn't have to go there! I don't suppose they've offered to send a taxi for you & DC (or a private bus)?

Mind you, if you can get a disability rights person to go with you - with a camera - it could be quite interesting. I wonder how good the disabled access is at their depot?

I sent a rather shitty response
And said no, going to the depot would not be okay, it would be hugely inconvienient - i am physically disabled and have two toddlers!

And cc'd mr p flynn, of course

Did refrain from asking if he was suggesting i keep my toddlers in the same place they think i do when i need to travel!

very unfair contact your MP

I copied him in on the reply. Coincidentally, he has a very similar health condition to one of mine, so I reckon he'll empathise :)

Ha anyone noticed the stagecoach rule about 4 kids provided they don't take the seat of a paying passenger??

So if the bus is full, a paying passenger gets on, do your children, all 4 that is, have to stand, or get off, if the passenger wants a seat?

I can see the Aibu now?!

Stops derailing thread!

It's because councils - and alot of other people - do not believe that a disabled person can also have a useful role in society.

You are disabled therefore you cannot look after a child. Therefore there is no situation where you will be travelling with your child alone.

You use the phrase "doesnt count as a "full fare paying adult". I'm afraid this easily slides into "doesnt count as a "full adult"

I'm a professional, disabled, single mother. I have met this attitude so many times. It hurts more each time.

I thought it was standard that children shouldn't take a fare-paid seat, holidays?

Good work, Beyond :) This must be discriminatory; I hope they get into trouble now!

So let me get this straight. You have a disabled pass, but actually finish up paying more than you would if you were able-bodied. Is that right?

Or do the children get a reduced rate which together amounts to less than an adult fare?

If it's the former, you should be home and dry if you decide to pursue this. If it's the latter, you're still being discriminated against, but you may need to work harder to explain it.

The bottom line is that there is a reason why disabled passengers get free travel - the need to get to appointments, inability to drive, financial hardship associated with having a disability etc.

By making you pay even some of that back, they're effectively saying 'yes, we accept that you need this, but we're not going to give it all to you because you have children.'

Could you get MN to tweet a link to the thread?

My local mn have tweeted it, I'll ask hq if they want to now. Good idea.

The way it works out...

Able bodied adult £1.60 first child free, second child £1
Disabled adult "free", first child £1, second child £1

So I do pay less than an adult, because paying for a child is cheaper than paying for myself. But as i explained to the bus company, it takes advantage of the fact that my bus pass is essential, so I have to travel with them. The able bodied adult may pay more, but they can choose to walk to the shops with their children. I cant.

Misc

I've had a response. Stating that it is not discriminatory because all non-full-fare paying adults have to pay for children (ie monthly pass holders too). Now funnily enough, I used to have a monthly pass, and was never charged for a child then.

Then
"The concessionary scheme is a Welsh Government policy that entitles the pass holder (and if stipulated on the pass a companion) only to free travel all day every day on our network of services. We, as a company, then claim for reimbursement from the local authority and are reimbursed at a percentage, historically 73.59%, of the average single fare. This year Welsh Government are cutting the budget for this scheme with reimbursement starting at around 61% of the average adult single fare."

They have looked before at allowing all under 5s free travel, but "this revenue is a significant stream and to remove this from the business would impact the commerciality of certain services"

Hmm... Would it be fair to say, that given they are recouping 60% of my fare from the Government, I should have to pay 40% of the child fare?

My maths showing the company is profiting from my disability...

Adult fare is £1.80, child £1.
Able bodied adult pays £1.80, gets child free = £1.80
Disabled adult free (60% recouped from gov - £1.08), pays for child £1 = £2.08

Got the fares wrong, doh!

Its £1.60 per journey, so Newport bus are getting 36p extra income (minimum, based on the 60% recouped from gov) from each journey I take, compared to an able-bodied parent

Stating that it is not discriminatory because all non-full-fare paying adults ...

Whether this is true or not, they're discriminating because your pass is supposed to bring you on a level with an able-bodied adult as far as possible: you can't walk or cycle into town for free, so you get to use public transport for free. Otherwise, you might be excluded from normal life.

They say they penalise able-bodied pass holders by charging for their children, so they'll penalise you as well. But your disability concession isn't supposed to bring you to a discounted level, or why would the council be contributing? That contribution is supposed to put you on a par with able-bodied, fare-paying passengers.

Is the fare £1.60 or £1.80? It still works out that they're profiting.

Don't know if the links on this page will be any help: www.traveline-cymru.info/traveline-cymru-help-with-travel-by-public-transport-in-wales/

xposted :)

I could have put that more clearly. Their "non-full-fare paying" parity argument only holds water if all the other pass-holders are having 60% of their fare paid by Newport council tax payers due to enhanced needs.

Which they aren't.

Woohoo! That all sounds brilliant, proof of discriminatory rules.

I'm so glad there is a way to hit back at this rubbish situation. Fight!

Under the Equality Act public authorities are supposed to do everything reasonably possible to make things easier for disabled people: it is a positive duty to take actual proactive steps to think of ways they can help. Their legal duty is to show that they are making every reasonable effort to support you. Instead what Newport is doing is fighting you and then trying to defend their punitive policies. And asking you to hop on the bus, no doubt paying again for your toddler, so they can offer you more ridiculous excuses for not doing anything at all to help

Maybe you could turn it around on them by asking them to detail the specific positive measures they have taken, as required by the Equality Act, to make it easier for disabled people to travel with their children.

If they didnt charge for under-5s when you had a monthly pass, then you have a much stronger case for disability discrimination.
If you start tweeting etc locally telling everyone that people with student passes, OAP bus passes, season ticket etc has to pay for under-5s on X bus company, I bet there will be a 'clarification' of the policy...

I can't believe they are charging anyone for under-5s. I always assumed they would be free everywhere. Jeez!

Newport may also need a reminder that disability discrimination is not like other prohibited grounds of discrimination (race, sex, etc) - it is different because they have to make reasonable adjustments to put disabled people in a situation where they are treated BETTER than other groups if necessary to allow them to participate as full members of society - here, just getting around from point a to b like everybody else.

It is not enough to show that they are treating you the SAME as other adults who are not paying full fares: they have to show that they are making it possible for you to go around on the bus like any other person by making reasonable adjustments to make that possible for you. Here in fact they are treating you WORSE (for shame). I cannot believe they are trying to defend this policy.

The arguments about cost are not going to carry any weight as a defence for Newport - maybe if they were actually at risk of going bankrupt tomorrow by letting toddlers whose parents are disabled travel without paying that £1 then a court might be sympathetic. Otherwise, not. They are making life difficult for disabled parents over something which is comparatively trivial as a proportion of their overall budget.