Incident at Signature Theatre today.....- Page 3

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 12:18am

I cannot believe it's 2016 and this is still something that could possibly happen. Mortifying. Kudos to you, iluvtheatertrash, as well as most everybody on this thread for their suggestions to catalyze change.

[theaterdrew]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 8:44am

This has been a very interesting discussion.  Under the ADA, the theater has an obligation to remove any architectural barriers that are easy and inexpensive to modify, or, if they have done any alterations on the theater, to make the "path of travel" more strictly accessible, which includes bathrooms and the hallways, etc., in and out of the theater.  As a general rule, the theater does not have an obligation to assist a patron in using the bathroom, which would include escorting them to and from the bathroom.  

There is no legal prohibition on "touching" a patron.  ChiTheaterFan hit the nail on the head about that--it's a policy adopted by the theater out of fear of bogus assault claims.  But, if there is a part of the theater a patron cannot access due to a disability, the theater has to consider "reasonable modifications" that would allow the patron to access it, and that might include providing them physical assistance.  For example, if the theater offers an after-program on the stage, and the only way to get on stage is to go up stairs, the theater might have to offer a disabled patron assistance on getting on that stage.

But, that's all about the actual law.  iluvtheatertrash has raised what to me is the most disturbing thing here, which is the employee's comments about not having to help "them."  They should be trained better on interacting with all patrons, including patrons with disabilities.  

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 9:53am

Let me clarify: she did not help using the bathroom. She simply had never been to Signature before and needed help finding the stall. I could not, for obvious reasons, take her into the lady's room. 

[theaterdrew]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 10:45am

^There is an important distinction there--did she want someone to take her arm and physically guide her to the bathroom, or did she want someone merely to walk with her so she didn't get lost?  If the latter, there is a better argument that the theater violated the ADA by refusing, especially if it was within the employee's scope of employment to assist patrons in general and the employee wouldn't be neglecting some other duty in order to do it.

[Sugar78]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 11:07am

Yes, the attitudes are often more restrictive and difficult to deal with than the physical barriers. I have another "them" story, but mine was at the other extreme.  I'm a lifelong wheelchair user, and as such I have very strong arms and get around very well with no assistance. At Spring Awakening last winter, an usher asked if I wanted her to push me to my seat, which was only maybe 4 feet away.  When I declined her offer, she snapped, "OH, so you're another one of THOSE!"  You'd be surprised how cranky some people get over independence.  Of course the best part is that this happened at SA with all it's mixed-ability glory.  So, there's the other end of the spectrum- I didn't ASK for assistance at all, it was offered randomly, and when I declined it, I got a rude response.

Does anyone know what, if any, training theatre staff receive related to interacting with patrons who have different abilities?  As part of my job I sometimes teach disability awareness/education programs to various business and community groups.  One of the questions I'm asked most often is, "How do I know if someone with a disability needs help?"  And my response is always, "If they ask for it."  And usually that works out pretty well, but I guess not so much in the case of the lady asking for assistance getting to the restroom. 

I can see the liability rationale in some cases.  For example, I don't roll into a theatre and expect staff to carry me up the stairs; that's an obvious liability.  But simply offering an arm to guide someone to the restroom who has requested that assistance just doesn't seem that risky to me, particularly given my misadventure with the usher wanting, apparently desperately, to push me to my seat. 

My last question- Is it clear that such assistance is not offered up front?  I'm still rather new to the Broadway experience (only an annual trip over the past 4 years so far), but I seem to remember seeing a note somewhere (theatre's web site, maybe?) that assistance is not available inside the theatre with activities such as navigating steps, etc.  I've never looked for any such information for people with vision impairments, though.  (I'm also assuming that web sites for theatres and shows are accessible for those with such needs to even get this information, which maybe I shouldn't assume) At any rate, I think total transparency about potential barriers is needed in general.  So often establishments, not just theatres, seem reluctant to be completely truthful about their accessibility, and this makes it difficult for those of us who have different needs to make plans and decisions based on our needs and comfort levels. 

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 11:56am

She barely gave me time to explain Dawn only needed help finding her way to it before interrupting and refusing. But I did make clear Dawn simply needed guidance to a stall.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 12:21pm

I am not an attorney, so I hope the lawyers here will understand I am merely asking questions, not challenging their knowledge.

Does the theater really have NO obligation to help a blind person locate a restroom? Because I'm having trouble understanding how a blind person would find the facilities, given that they are located in different places in different theaters.

And how is the location to be communicated without taking the blind person to the restroom door? I don't understand how telling a blind patron, "The loo is on the mezzanine level, stairs are house left" would be very helpful.

If I understood correctly, PTThespian said the letter of the law simply required there be no physical obstructions, but I'm assuming there wasn't a private toilet at the end of the blind patron's row. Don't the patrons entering the theater, going to the concessions stand, etc., constitute very real obstacles to a person with no sight? Or is the law worded so that only architectural obstacles are banned?

BTW, thanks to all for a civil conversation and a special thanks to the legal professionals who are willing to share their hard-earned knowledge.

[morosco]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 12:29pm

Here's some valuable general information from the New Jersey Theatre Alliance about communicating with people with disabilities.  

https://njtheatrealliance.org/accessibility/communicating-people-disabilities

[Cape Twirl of Doom]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 1:12pm

This reminds me of something that happened a few weeks ago when I was ushering at She Loves Me. A man and his wife were seated in the front row of the Orchestra, on the center right aisle. The man's wife was in a wheelchair, so that seat had been removed for wheelchair seating (I think it had been A101, so the man himself was seated in A102 - it was clear that a numbered seat had been removed.) An older couple sit down behind them (B101 & 102) and the man gets absolutely furious! He waves me over to complain that the wheelchair in front is blocking his view, and says "This is not right! They should just be put over there! That should be moved!" waving his hand towards the far right side of the stage. Like he was talking about a stack of boxes in his way. I was just gobsmacked, I really had no idea what to say to that. I am sure that the woman in the wheelchair heard every word, the man was right behind her! This horrible man went on and on about how they have been sitting in these seats for years and they have never had anyone in front of them, that spot was always empty! Mind you, it was definitely a numbered seat which had been removed to accommodate her chair, as the husband was in 102. Before the show had begun seating, the head usher let me know that a wheelchair patron would be coming to use that seat today.

No matter what I said to the man, he would not stop angrily complaining so I called over one of the ushers on headset to deal with it. She was not having any of his **** but said that there was an empty seat 5 rows behind him that he could move to if it was that much of an issue and the man refused! He refused to move to an almost identical seat (on probably with a better view!) because, as he kept saying, "That should be moved, not me! I don't want to move! That goes over there!" The head usher was (of course) not going to move the wheelchair patron, never mind that if the person had been moved to where the man was pointing, she would have been in front of seats A-2, 4 or 6, but of course the man didn't care about that.

I had just never seen just blatant rudeness before from a patron! After intermission his seat was empty, I guess he left.

[AC126748]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 1:19pm

That's disgusting to read, Cape Twirl, but sadly not uncommon. I can't tell you how many times I've witnessed my disabled nephew referred to as if he were not there, or as if he were a piece of furniture that is just placed in someone's way as an annoyance. I always want to jump out of my skin and go crazy on the person, but sometimes that can just draw more attention to the situation and cause greater embarrassment. 

[theaterdrew]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 1:43pm

GavestonPS, there is a distinction under the ADA between having to offer "services of a personal nature" and having to provide auxiliary aids and services and/or making reasonable modifications to policies and practices.  The line between them can be fuzzy.  One of the examples given is that a clothing store does not need to help a customer with a disability try on clothes, unless it provides that service to other customers, but it does need to remove architectural barriers in the dressing rooms when to do so is of little or no cost.  That might include making sure there are no hangers or clothing left on the floor, for example, or replacing door knobs with levers.  In the theater context, the theater should provide instructions to the patron in a way that the patron can make use of them (that NJ Theatre Alliance posting above has some excellent examples of how you give instructions to a person who cannot see) but isn't required to provide someone who will physically guide the person by the arm to (and into) the bathroom.  

The thing is, most people who are blind don't want or need someone to take them by the arm.  They may want someone to walk with them, and that could be reasonable if it is not unduly disruptive to theater's operations. I must confess that when I read the initial description, I understood it to mean the patron was looking for someone to take her by the arm and walk her to the bathroom.  That just emphasizes the most important point in any of these scenarios, which is the first obligation is to ask what the patron requires and not have a knee-jerk response to reject it.

Unfortunately, as the other situations discussed in this thread show, very little training is conducted about interacting with people with disabilities, or how to handle others who view accommodating people with disabilities as inconvenient to their selfish interests.  The ADA does not mandate training, and I think it should.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 3:01pm

3:05pm, still haven't heard from Signature. Not only is Dawn owed an apology, but so am I. I don't know if they reached out to her. I sincerely hope they did.

Signature's Facebook has been inundated by posts thanks to this spreading around the community. Their review rating has dipped from a solid 5-star to 4.2 in one day. They're posting about happy hour. And they've yet to address ANYONE who posted about this incident.

Their silence is deafening. And disgusting.

[addicted]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 5:49pm

@iluvtheatertrash - thanks for posting.  I suspect the reason you haven't heard from them is because they are waiting for their lawyers to help draft a response.  Hopefully they make this right.

[morosco]

Posted: 6/2/16 at 6:07pm

And they've yet to address ANYONE who posted about this incident.
Their silence is deafening. And disgusting.

I hope they're not taking the "ignore the problem and it'll go away" approach.  Seems similar to the way they treated Dawn,  ignore "them" and they'll go away.

[PK2]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 9:25am

This is a truly upsetting report.  What more upsetting is that it's not a problem of one individual staff member but it is included several other staffs so it is an organization problem.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 11:15am

Apparently Signature doesn't know how to chain its tweets together, but here's the first of a few apologetic ones, without referring to the specific incident:

https://twitter.com/SignatureTheatr/status/738739693588762624

 

And: 

https://www.facebook.com/signaturetheatrecompany/posts/10153404186532574

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 1:12pm

Just had a very nice chat with David Hatkoff of Signature Theatre Company. They are working very, very hard to correct the incidents. They hope to have a forum on disabilities and accessibility and will be updating me on its future. I'm so glad we have sparked this discussion, and so happy Signature was willing to hear me out and start taking steps to make sure it never happens again.

Please give them the TIME to correct this. It won't happen instantly, but I do have faith it WILL happen. 

Thank you for being a part of this discussion. Let's make sure it doesn't end here, but let's also make sure we are HELPING Signature correct it so that we can ALL still enjoy the wonderful theatre they produce.

[Rock Lobster]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 1:33pm

I think we all agree that the house manager's response was completely inappropriate and hurtful, and should be investigated by the organization, and appropriate action taken- whether it's a formal apology to Dawn, disciplinary action against the employee, and additional training on ADA compliance & sensitivity training for both volunteer and paid staff. As in any organization, they need time to conduct a thorough review and assess what measures to take- unfortunately, they're not moving at the speed that 'internet justice' demands. 

 

I think you have every right to make your complaints to the theatre higher ups- but I object to your characterization that this one particular, isolated incident is indicative of a greater hostility towards disabled theatre patrons on behalf of Signature. In fact, this seems to be a terrible aberration from their mission of inclusion- and it's disappointing, certainly. It's one thing to demand an explanation and an apology- but calling for boycotts or continued online disparagement (via Facebook, Twitter) is unnecessarily spiteful towards an institution that has always committed itself to theater for the masses. If this were a systematic problem at Signature, with multiple complaints against the organization then of course, fire away. But it isn't, and they don't.

 

There's a fine line between using Social Media to provoke a prompt response, and incitement to smear. We forget that there are actual people on the receiving end of these complaints who are likely just as horrified and scrambling to make sense of how something like this could have happened- people who need to parse out the details and yes, consult with HR and Legal. They may not respond, initially, the way we were expecting. I know that doesn't assuage your feelings of being dismissed, but perhaps we need to take a step back from the anger and let them respond, more thoughtfully, to the complaint. 

 

Let me be clear- I'm not condoning the exchange. That's a completely unacceptable way to handle the situation- but they have an obligation to Dawn and to the other disabled patrons to perform due diligence to ensure that no one is ever treated the same way. 

 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 2:42pm

Before one of the performances of An American in Paris I was working at, the house manager held a meeting for all the ushers. They explained about the policy regarding touching patrons (both the elderly and those with disabilities.) There were some things that we were told we'd want to do out of natural kindness, but couldn't. For example, say that there was an elderly patron who has trouble with balance. We could take them by the arm to the bathroom. But, even then, we were told that we'd be walking on murky waters as far as insurance/policy dictates. There was even a situation of a woman who used a wheelchair but transferred out of it to a regular seat during the show. The ushers were not allowed to physically pick her up and put her back in her wheelchair. All it takes is one person to call foul for things to go wrong. Example being, one could say that they were touched in a way that was not appropriate.   Granted, every theatre that I've worked at gets the same rule from the higher ups but deals with this policy in their own way. I am not saying I agree with all this, but at the same time I am stuck between a rock and a hard place in that, my feelings on the policy and what I am told to do regarding it don't matter. 

And, it amazes me to the extent of how selfish patrons are. At the same theatre, there were a couple of elderly men who came up to me, stating that they have bad backs, and sitting in the seats were hurting. They saw that we had cushion booster seats and thought that the extra padding might help things out. I gave it to them, and it clearly worked for them. Now, understand that this was in the balcony of the Palace which really wasn't that full. There were two women who complained that the guys using the boosters A, most likely shouldn't have them because they felt that they were just for kids, and B, had to move from their seats, a couple of rows back putting them in the last row of the balcony. Moving them or offering to do so would've been the only thing I could do. Yet, they still bitched and moaned about how they weren't in their  seats. 

I do know that in every theatre, theres a backup plan for every single kind of situation that could come up during a show or with the audience at intermission. While I don't condone what happened at Signature, I am wondering if by chance, the house manager was dealing with what could have been a potential sticky situation and one that she didn't know how to manage because maybe it never came up. Once again, I am not saying that what happened was good. It wasn't. I am just trying to look at things from another vantage point to get a full picture of things. 

[bunnie3]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 2:59pm

Completely agree with RockLobster.  Glad how this is resolving, iluvtheatertrash.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 3:09pm

I don't recall I ever called for a boycott... Others did, not me. I have however been vocal about this and do not regret it. And while I said I woukd hesitate before returning, I was also willing to hear them out and tried several times to have a fruitful conversation with them. David Hatkoff handed it VERY differently than his other staff and we had a very fruitful talk, even brainstorming ideas together how we can keep this conversation going instead of sweeping it under the rug. 

I think I have been incredibly patient and, most importantly, always hopeful that they'd resolve it. As I told David, I thought this behavior was very out of character of an organization I have always long admired...

[SweetLips]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 4:53pm

I come from a different time and era.

In 'my day' of theatre ushering I smiled [flirted], tore tickets and sometimes walked people to their seats.

Can never remember a meeting with the House Manager for Fof H rules but as I have some sort of natural ability that draws me toward the elderly and frail I was often escorting,offering my arm to support them to their seat.

I am extremely tactile and in my volunteering now I am forever touching/picking up little children, putting my arm around the elderly, hugging fellow staff and even just rubbing their backs saying 'good job today or thanks'.

There will ALWAYS be people who are selfish and unfeeling[look how long the thread is on Bad Theatre Behaviour]; just do what YOU feel is right and remember that the space we take up here on earth is shared and NOT exclusively yours !

Some people SHOULD work with people and there are jobs where machinery is a better work companion for others.

I hope and feel sure that this will be resolved in a way that benefits everyone.

SL........special xx to iluvtheatretrash for helping and fighting for another.

[smidge]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 6:40pm

Unfortunately, in today's lawsuit happy society, businesses are wary of anything that might cause them trouble. And common courtesy has fallen by the wayside. But there's no excuse for any employee's rudeness and ignorance when someone is seeking help. Fortunately there are still kind people like theatretrash who understand how to care for people.

[uncageg]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 8:57pm

Why do they need to hold a panel discussion? Why does this need to take time? Your employee was rude, reprimand her. Guidelines were posted here on interacting with disabled patrons, make sure they are correct and impliment them. I have seen plenty of theater staff members around the city take care of people with disibilities with no problem.  Just my thoughts.

[Mike Costa]

Posted: 6/3/16 at 9:49pm

An enlightening thread.   First, if you are a playwright then you know not to bother someone wearing a headset "a few minutes before curtain".  They are in charge of something and  this is not the time to talk with them about a patron with a bathroom problem.  They have a job to do.   If you choose to take on the problems of a fellow theatergoer good for you, but it is your responsibility, not theirs.

 

Next, are you sure this particular woman with the headset was not recently reprimanded for assisting too many people in the past and had recently been warned not to touch them since the theater would be liable?

Perhaps what came out of her mouth was her training or warning from management.  Regardless, she let you know she could not help at that moment.  It was not the most polite way but perhaps you were pestering her during her most important moments of her duty.

 

Do you have any idea if this group was told to have sufficient numbers of chaperones and chose not to?

Do you know if the staff was specifically spoken to before the performance about this group refusing to have chaperones and warned not to touch them for legal reasons?

Do you expect theaters to have extra staff on hand to assist certain patrons with bathroom problems at curtain time or is that the responsibility of the ticket buyer themselves?

 

Good for you for choosing to help Dawn.  Bad for you for writing about it because a woman on a headset did not give you the reply you expected.  Have you ever misspoken at your job, did someone go online to write about it and call your manager?  They are just underpaid theater workers. She simply misspoke.  Choose your targets more wisely.

 

I have never attended a performance at The Signature Theater.