The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal mandate for ensuring equal opportunities for disabled individuals across a range of different products, services, and sectors. This act has served America’s disabled population well, but with web accessibility lawsuits on the rise, it is still far from achieving its goal.
According to the stats, ADA web accessibility lawsuits increased by 400% between 2017 and 2022. For the first time since then, in 2023, plaintiff filings saw a significant drop. This is positive, but with 2,794 web accessibility lawsuits still looming large, 189 of them in Pennsylvania, the need for ADA compliance is still very much alive. So, what is the ADA, what are the biggest causes of non-compliance, and how do you address them? If you’re a Pennsylvanian business seeking answers, this article is for you.
What is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil rights law that was enacted in 1990 to prevent discrimination against individuals with disabilities. It ensures that disabled people have the same opportunities as everyone else in areas like employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications, and access to government programs.
The ADA is divided into five sections, known as “titles,” which outline its scope:
- Title I: Employment – Prohibits discrimination in the workplace and applies to employers with 15 or more employees.
- Title II: State and Local Government – Ensures equal access to programs and services offered by public entities.
- Title III: Public Accommodations – Requires that businesses open to the public provide accessible facilities and services.
- Title IV: Telecommunications – Mandates accessible communication for individuals with hearing or speech disabilities.
- Title V: Miscellaneous Provisions – Addresses other areas, including retaliation and attorney’s fees.
The importance of Title III
Let’s zoom in on Title III for a minute. When the ADA was first enacted, before the internet became mainstream, Title III’s requirements pertained primarily to physical accessibility. However, in recent years, Title III has been interpreted to include digital accessibility under its definition of ‘public accommodations’.
In short, a public accommodation is any entity that offers goods or services to the public, which encompasses websites, mobile apps, and other digital platforms. This now means that an online retailer in Pennsylvania, for example, must ensure its website complies with accessibility guidelines to avoid potential ADA-related lawsuits.
Free ADA Compliance Audit of your Website
Detecting ADA Compliance issues has never been easier than it is now. At Recite Me we offer a free automated scan of your websites homepage. This will identify and highlight any non-compliance on your website. Followed by recommendations on how to implement the necessary changes to improve your websites accessibility score and standing.
Which businesses do the Pennsylvania ADA guidelines apply to?
The ADA’s guidelines apply broadly, leaving few exceptions, which is why it is important to assess whether your organization falls under its remit. So, to whom does the ADA apply?
First and foremost, the ADA applies to both public and private sector organizations. This includes: any employer with 15 or more employees; all state and local governments, regardless of size, such as public libraries, schools, and municipal offices; and any organization which is considered a public accommodation.
As mentioned earlier, a public accommodation is any business, facility, or service that is open to members of the public. This can include brick-and-mortar institutions like restaurants, hotels, and shopping malls, as well as digital offerings like e-commerce sites, online learning platforms, and government websites.
Even if your business does not fall into one of these predefined categories, adopting ADA compliance measures is highly recommended. It acts as a safeguard against future legal challenges and helps instil important inclusion best practices throughout your organization’s policies and strategies.
Biggest causes of website ADA non-compliance in Pennsylvania and how to fix them
Awareness of common ADA failures is the first step toward compliance. This section outlines some frequent issues and potential fixes.
Missing image alt text
Image alt text is a text-based description that is embedded inside the code of an image. It allows screen readers to interpret the purpose of an image, conveying said purpose to visually impaired users who may not otherwise be able to perceive the image. An e-commerce site, for example, might embed alt text for one of its product images, reading: ‘blue striped collared shirt with chest pocket on left-hand-side’. This is both appropriately descriptive and jargon-free.
Poor color contrast
When there is insufficient color contrast between text and its background, content becomes unreadable for those with visual impairments. Instead, high contrast colors should be paired with each other. According to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), normal-sized text requires a minimum color contrast ratio of 4.5:1, which pertains to color combinations like dark blue text on a light gray background, or black and white.
Lack of keyboard accessibility
Internet users with mobility issues often rely on keyboards to navigate website pages. This means, in order to stay ADA compliant, Pennsylvanian businesses must ensure their websites and forms have a logical tab order, and that everything can be accessed via keyboard alone.
Unlabeled form fields
Unlabeled forms lack the necessary field descriptors which allow assistive technologies like screen readers to be able to identify and interpret them. The screen reader might know that the form is there, but cannot communicate relevant field names, such as “Date of Birth” and “Email”, to the user, making it extremely difficult for the user to complete the form.
Inaccessible PDFs
Under the ADA, Pennsylvanian companies are required to make their PDFs accessible. This involves using PDF tools to tag and structure documents, and could even involve using OCR (optical character recognition) technology to make scanned image text searchable. It also means employing general accessibility best practices, like ensuring content is clear and free from technical jargon.
The importance of continuous accessibility testing for ADA compliance in Pennsylvania
Things change over time; website designs are adjusted, new technologies are released, and regulations are updated. In other words, just because your website or digital platform is ADA compliant now, that does not mean it will stay that way forever. Conducting regular accessibility audits is the best way to safeguard against this.
Start by employing automated tools, such as an accessibility checker. Allow the software to conduct a rapid scan of your website’s code, flagging any obvious inaccessible or non-compliant features. For more comprehensive coverage of accessibility issues, combine automated testing with manual and user testing.
These methods demand a greater time and effort investment, but the payout is ultimately worth it. Manual and user testing involve accessibility experts and disabled users conducting tests on your site to uncover accessibility issues on a more granular level.
Ultimately, reliable ADA compliance testing is the single most important factor in staying compliant. Without testing, your accessibility efforts are mere guesswork, meaning you could still be leaving your site vulnerable to ADA non-compliance and all the fallout that comes with it.
What are the risks of not complying with Pennsylvania ADA laws
Accessibility can sometimes be viewed as non-essential, relegating it to the bottom of company priority lists, where it remains until spare resources allow it to be addressed. However, accessibility is indeed very essential. Neglecting it, and thus failing to comply with the ADA, can threaten the long-term viability of your business in ways that many so-called ‘essential’ obligations do not. If repercussions are not financial, they’re reputational. And if not reputational, they’re legal. This section details some of the main risks of ADA non-compliance in Pennsylvania.
Legal penalties
Failing to comply with ADA regulations can result in substantial fines. First-time violations may incur penalties of up to $75,000, while subsequent offenses can cost businesses $150,000 or more. A coffee shop in Pennsylvania with a non-compliant website could face lawsuits filed by frustrated individuals or advocacy groups, which result in having to pay these hefty fines.
Reputational damage
Negative publicity surrounding ADA non-compliance can tarnish a business’s reputation, driving away current and future customers. Social media backlash could erupt if news of an ADA lawsuit gets out, or if a company is thought to be excluding its disabled customers. These kinds of reputational setbacks can cause lasting harm to an organization’s public image and customer trust, which can be difficult to come back from.
Lost business opportunities
By failing to make their services accessible, Pennsylvanian businesses can end up excluding a significant portion of the population, which can result in huge lost revenue opportunities. But it’s not just the people you exclude that end up not buying your products and services, it’s their friends and families too. Instead, they turn to your more inclusive competitors in search of a welcome stay.
Operational setbacks
Addressing accessibility issues reactively, rather than proactively, can disrupt normal business operations. A law firm, for example, might be forced to redesign its website under legal duress, leading to unexpected costs and operational delays. These reactive measures are often more expensive and time-consuming than taking preventative action.
Stay ahead of the game when it comes to Digital Accessibility laws and compliance in the United States. Learn about all the different federal and state-level regulations, see real examples of web accessibility lawsuits in different regions and discover a 7-step action plan for building accessible websites.
Examples of real Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuits in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania recently ranked third in the United States for the number of ADA-related lawsuits, with a total of 189 cases filed. This section outlines just a few of these cases, emphasizing the pressing need for Pennsylvanian organizations to take swift action against inaccessibility.
U.S. v DeNunzio’s Restaurant Inc.
In 2005, the U.S. The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against DeNunzio’s Restaurant in Jeannette, Pennsylvania, alleging that it violated Title III of the ADA because it failed to remove physical barriers that impeded access for individuals with disabilities.
The case was eventually resolved through a Consent Decree, which included that DeNunzio’s install one accessible parking space in the lot closest to the entrance, and that it modify its procedures to better accommodate disabled dining guests. These measures were implemented to ensure compliance with the ADA and to provide equal access to individuals with disabilities.
Migyanko v. Aimbridge Hospitality
In the case of Migyanko v Aimbridge Hospitality, the plaintiff, a wheelchair user named Ronald Migyanko, filed a lawsuit against Aimbridge Hospitality. Mr. Migyanko alleged that the beds in their hotel rooms were too high, making them inaccessible for individuals with mobility disabilities. Migyanko claimed that this constituted a violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation.
The claim was resolved through a settlement agreement in which Aimbridge Hospitality agreed to assess and adjust the bed heights in their accessible rooms. The company also committed to implementing policies that ensure future compliance with ADA requirements and agreed to provide ADA training for staff members. To monitor compliance with these terms, Aimbridge Hospitality were ordered to report on their progress.
U.S. v. Bern Township
In the case of U.S. v Bern Township, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Bern Township in Berks County, Pennsylvania, for discriminating against a stroke survivor who was terminated from his job. The township refused to consider the employee’s request for reasonable accommodation and relied on a collective bargaining agreement provision that required a physician’s release without limitation.
