Hello everyone, when you’re reading this newsletter, I’m in Dublin attending a transport conference. The Accessible Link has had a big increase in subscribers since the last newsletter from around the world. A warm welcome to everyone of you who is new here. You can read a bit more about me at the end of this newsletter. I also welcome all new subscribers of the RAIL magazine who came here after reading my column. Have a great week!

11% of disabled rail passengers who booked assistance when travelling by train last year received none of it. And that figure has barely moved in three years. The sector looks at that number and calls it a challenge to address. Waiting for assistance at the airport beyond the legally mandated 20-minute limit is a well-known issue for everyone who can’t leave a plane without assistance. And these are current legal requirements that aren’t met, not a gold-plated assistance concept.

The compliance ceiling

Most train operators and airports now understand that accessibility is a legal requirement. The Equality Act 2010 exists. The 1107/2006 regulation, the EU and UK law for aviation, has been in effect for nearly two decades. The CAA publishes accessibility assessment reports. The ORR has Accessible Travel Policies and benchmarking reports on passenger assistance delivery. Progress, technically.

And yet. In 2024/25, 11% of passengers reported they received none of the assistance they had booked. Independent of the “inconvenience this causes” (a term I would immediately delete from any comms in the railway industry), it has such an underestimated impact on disabled people, mentally and physically.

The worst train operators or airports named in the ORR or CAA reports didn’t fail disabled passengers because they were unaware accessibility mattered. They failed because good intentions and legal minimums are not the same thing as reliable delivery. And not even the legal requirements are always met. In German, there’s an idiom that translates “Where’s no claimant there’s no judge”, and that seems to be the case far too often. So nothing happens even when the law is not followed.

Still, compliance is a floor, not a ceiling. The sector continues to treat it as the destination.

Attitude is the infrastructure nobody wants to fund

I’ve been in situations where the ramp arrived, the staff member turned up, the booking was correct, and the experience was still awful. Not because anything went mechanically wrong, but because the person assisting me made clear, in words, tone and body language, that I was an inconvenience. Once, I was even shouted at when the train arrived and the door opened before I even said a word because I was in the wheelchair space, and the staff member was very upset that he had to carry the ramp all the way to the wheelchair space carriage. Yeah, a ramp needed for the accessible carriage. What an inconvenience!

This is the thing the benchmarking reports can’t fully capture, though the research is starting to try. A recent academic study on airport accessibility found that attitudinal barriers emerged as a distinct and significant theme in disabled passengers’ experiences, separate from physical, service, and communication barriers. The very act of receiving assistance service led some passengers to perceive negative interactions from staff and “othering” from other passengers.

In aviation, the Aviation Accessibility Task and Finish Group’s 2025 report recommended mandatory disability equality training for all aviation staff, developed with disabled people. That’s long overdue. But training changes knowledge; attitude change requires something harder, which is genuine contact with disabled people’s actual lives, not a module and a tick-box. I’m a huge advocate for getting disabled facilitators for these trainings as minimum. I would even say, nothing else works. People need to speak to disabled people to understand their experiences and be able to ask questions about it.

The operators who get accessibility right have disabled people on their teams, in their design processes, and in their senior leadership teams. That’s not an accessibility initiative. That’s basic organisational sense.

The experience, not just the service

The key questions are: is the accessibility provision seamless for a disabled person who has no idea about what’s happening in the background? Is it comparable to the seamless experience of non-disabled people? Or is it a visible, effortful, special process that marks out the disabled passenger as different at every step?

Great accessibility design dissolves into the experience. The step-free route is also the most direct route. The assistance booking confirmation includes all the information you actually need, not just a reference number. The staff member at the other end already knows you’re coming and what you need.

What normally happens is that disabled passengers carry the mental load of the entire system: remembering to book ahead, remembering which entrance to use, where the meeting point is, explaining their needs at every handover point, advocating for themselves when something goes wrong. The passenger does the work that the operator hasn’t done.

There is currently no comprehensive data on how often failed assists occur on rail, especially when the passenger has not booked ahead. When you measure something properly, you have to take responsibility for it.

If the experience requires the passenger to carry knowledge and mental load no non-disabled passenger has to carry to make it on a train or plane, the system has failed. So, involve disabled people in testing from the beginning, not as a final check, including when designing staff training. Training developed without disabled input tends to teach what non-disabled people imagine disability looks like.

Require your assistance staff to be trained before they interact with passengers. This should be obvious. The fact that train operators still have untrained passenger-facing staff 6 years after it became mandatory is frankly scandalous. And no customer cares if they work for an agency or are directly employed.

Measure attitude of staff, not just delivery. The ORR has said it will evolve the framework to include new metrics such as passenger confidence post-assistance. That’s the right direction. Confidence is an outcome. It tells you whether the passenger felt safe, respected, and capable of travelling independently, which is the whole point.

And stop treating “no complaints” as evidence of good performance. Disabled people often don’t complain because they’ve learned it changes nothing and because they have so many reasons to complain, they wouldn’t do anything else. Silence is not satisfaction.

Some interesting links

• The UK rail regulator ORR has accepted an improvement plan from West Midlands Trains (WMT) after finding its first submission insufficiently robust. The plan, resubmitted in May 2026, sets out 12 months of actions to fix unreliable passenger assistance for disabled people, including new oversight dashboards, internal customer action groups, and a feasibility study for a dedicated passenger assistance control desk. ORR will hold WMT to monthly progress updates and meetings, warning it expects “meaningful improvements” in the experience of disabled passengers.

• Transport Focus has published its research after asking more than 12,000 rail passengers across England, Scotland and Wales what matters to them. The research provides a ranking for various aspects of travelling by train,

  including accessibility.

  

• Hundreds of new, electric buses are coming to West Yorkshire. Each bus will have two wheelchair spaces, flexible space for pushchairs and luggage, and USB charging points.

• The Sign Language Bill in Northern Ireland has passed the final stage, meaning British Sign Language (BSL) and Irish Sign Language (ISL) will be recognised as languages of Northern Ireland.

Something to watch

Get a first look at London's new Piccadilly line trains as they prepare to hit the tracks. I especially like the new wheelchair space. It’s spacious and easy to manoeuvre in.

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• The Ministry of Justice is searching for an Accessibility Specialist.

• The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology is searching for a Head of Digital Confidence and Accessibility.

• Oversharing about your child’s disability has become a lucrative trend on social media. For disability justice advocate Rebecca Cokley, these videos look an awful lot like a modern-day version of the old circus “freak show.”

• I just finished “This is for everyone: The unfinished story of the World Wide Web” by Tim Berners-Lee - My rating: 5/5 - Amazing autobiography and biography of the internet. Chapter 8 is about accessibility (with a special mention of Shadi Abou-Zahra, a wheelchair user and accessibility evangelist I know from Austria). There is also a chapter about the London 2012 Olympic Opening Ceremony, an experience we share. I absolutely love this book. If you’re interested in the internet and its history, this is your book too.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

I am German. I grew up there, and I navigated this country as a wheelchair user for the first 29 years of my life, and then I moved to the UK. That was twenty years ago. When I go back now, something strange happens. I expected to see progress. Instead, I feel the gap between the country I remember and expect, and the country that exists, and that gap keeps widening every time I visit. I expected things to have improved when I visited, but they hadn’t. That is reverse culture shock: not a tourist being disappointed, but rather returning to the place that shaped me and finding it harder and harder to defend.

The Myth of German Engineering

Germany has a reputation for engineering and efficiency, and for a long time, the world believed it. I did too, and sometimes still do. I’m currently in the process of buying a German dishwasher, so that you know what I mean. So it’s a particular kind of whiplash to arrive at a newly built platform and find steps.

The new airport in Berlin also has a brand-new railway station, with double-decker airport express trains. Unfortunately, the train doesn’t meet the platform height. The train is far lower than the platform. The floor with a decline inside the train is not high enough to match the platform. So the conductor has to put another mobile boarding ramp inside the train on the declined floor, which makes the whole boarding experience “interesting”.

When I arrived at the airport railway station, it wasn’t an issue. I had a very lovely conductor who did everything in his power to help me and everyone else who was just arriving in Germany. So I was quite optimistic when I set off on my way back, 5 days later, at Hauptbahnhof. First, nobody came. And then a ca. 10-year-old boy watching me had the brilliant idea to press the wheelchair button inside the train. Not once, ten times. This did the trick, and a furious conductor appeared, telling me off for not booking assistance 24 hours beforehand. I didn’t even know I had to. After all, this is an airport train. They can’t really expect people who aren't from Germany to know exactly when they are travelling and how to book, and there wasn’t an issue on the inbound train. Conductor Outbound was stressed by my pure existence big time. I played dumb and tried to reassure her that she would manage. She did, of course.

No Victorians to blame

Other than the Brits, the Germans have no Victorians to blame for their steps everywhere. They have many new or refurbished platforms and buildings. One that someone designed, approved, and signed off on after the Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz had been law for over two decades. Last year, the tram line in front of my hotel got refurbished and was unusable during my time there. So this year I was again optimistic that I would be able to use it without manoeuvring a step into the tram. Wrong again. There was a big fat step, and the driver didn’t move when I looked at it in disbelief. I had to ask him to open “the ramp” onto the tram, or do something, as I had no idea how this whole system works. And ‘ramp’ is an overstatement. It was a little lid that was far too steep. That was the moment when I seriously asked myself, who invented the measuring tape? Certainly not the Germans. I have no idea if this was the driver’s fault or if this is meant to be like that. Anyway, it became close to unusable for me.

Then, the pretty new U5 U-Bahn with its brand-new trains. I had no issues boarding the U5 trains at the closest station to my hotel. So I assumed (big mistake!) that the next station, Rotes Rathaus, wouldn’t be a problem either. The network plan had a lift sign and was labelled in the same way as my station at the hotel. To my big surprise, the new and shiny U5 had a big fat step again out of the train. A friend had to lift me out of the train. Luckily, I wasn’t on my own.

No Equality Act

Here is what people often miss: Germany does not have anything equivalent to the UK Equality Act 2010. The Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz and even the Anti-Discrimination Act, the main disability equality laws, apply either primarily to federal public bodies or are a paper tiger. Enforcement remains weak and difficult for individual disabled people in a service environment outside employment. It is nothing compared to the UK law. There is no meaningful compensation mechanism for disabled people who face barriers. It’s all very bureaucratic, and organisations rarely get a slap on the wrist. And they know that. You can complain, and you can be ignored or get a very German letter back, and that is largely the end of it. Often, you feel more offended than you were before.

That legal vacuum matters enormously. In the UK, the Equality Act creates at least the theoretical conditions for accountability. It is imperfect and under-enforced, but the principle is there: reasonable adjustments are a legal duty, and failure to do so has consequences. In Germany, the duty is thinner, if it exists at all, and the consequences are close to nonexistent. So when a bus driver refuses to let you board, as this happened to me as well this time and last time I visited, there is no legal lever to pull. The architecture of complaint leads nowhere.

The infrastructure problems are one thing. But there is something else I notice when I go back, and it is harder to name because it requires me to say something uncomfortable about the culture I come from.

I have lived in the UK for twenty years. The British have their own deeply ingrained awkwardness around disability: people pushing the back of your wheelchair without asking, for example. But the intention reads as engagement. Someone has clocked you. You exist to them. When I go back to Germany, the experience is the opposite.

Brits to the rescue

On my way to the Hauptbahnhof, my very heavy suitcase tipped over on one of the many tiny steps they have everywhere. My wheelchair could cope; my suitcase couldn’t. On a very busy pavement, nobody came; nobody offered help, even though I was visibly struggling. Then a tourist couple appeared and helped me to get the suitcase up again. Funny enough, they were Brits. They were not awkward; they were just polite and pulled me out of a situation I couldn’t get out of myself.

There seems to be an active effort not to notice disabled people in Germany in day-to-day life. People look past you. Help is rarely offered without being asked for. If something is visibly difficult, the prevailing social code seems to be to respect your autonomy by leaving you entirely alone with the problem. I grew up in that culture, and I did not fully understand what it cost me until I had something to compare it to. I blame the much higher level of exclusion of disabled people in general in Germany compared to other countries.

Exclusion from the start

Germany has a special school system that would shock every Brit. When I went to school in the 80s and 90s, more than 90% of disabled children went to special schools. I was in the 10% bracket and went to a mainstream school. If you exclude disabled people from the start, society will not learn how to treat disabled people normally and equally. They are not used to it. Until today, Germany has sheltered workshops for disabled people. They got heavily criticised for it by the United Nations and other bodies. Currently, there is a campaign to secure a decent salary for people in sheltered workshops. They often get no more than €200 a month.

I understand some of the history that sits underneath this. Germany carries the weight of the Nazi time that systematically murdered disabled people, framed as mercy, encoded as policy. That history has created a particular wariness: a reluctance to comment on, draw attention to, or overtly engage with disability in public. The social discomfort is real, and it runs deep. But understanding the history does not mean accepting the outcome. Disabled people are not made safer or more equal by being politely ignored and excluded. Also, Berlin is more progressive in terms of accessibility than other German cities. Two years ago, I was in Düsseldorf and couldn’t even get off the tram at Hauptbahnhof. This is a political decision not to fix things, and this is a sign of normalised exclusion.

Another example: I never saw so many misused accessible toilets in my whole life in one week. And when I asked a waiter at a restaurant if they had an accessible toilet, he insisted I use the toilet now because he wanted to block it later with a table for a big group. So I had to go to the toilet when he decided, or not go at all. It was hilarious, if not sad.

I still live in hope

There is a version of Germany that gets this right, where accessibility is not an afterthought carved out of the original design and where a disabled person is neither stared at nor carefully unseen. Level boarding of the ICE-L is a good example or the re:publica conference I have been going to for nearly two decades, where they get it right. It’s often driven by very few people with decision competence who don’t look away but actively decide to do the right thing. That’s great, and it can be fruitful, but it’s not enough for a whole country. They need proper legislation. Germany is already 30 years behind. The UK has changed so much since 1992, when I first visited as a teenager, not just because everyone is so kind, but also because of the Disability Discrimination Act and the Equality Act that followed. It’s actually a good example of how a country can change. It’s still not perfect, but there was a huge progress. I won’t lose hope of seeing progress when I visit Germany next time. Even though I might get disappointed again.

Some interesting links

• It’s 2026, and still, airlines refuse disabled people boarding, this time a 13-year-old boy with Tourette’s at Gatwick Airport and a sunflower lanyard around his neck. Ironically, Gatwick Airport is the birthplace of the sunflower lanyard, but that didn’t seem to change anything on the ground for British Airways. I find it seriously disturbing how people with Tourette’s are still treated (wasn’t everyone so very keen to improve services for neurodivergent people? Lip services…). It’s a textbook example of what I have written about the sunflower lanyard last time. No lanyard will solve training and attitude issues.

• Eurostar reports a big increase in assistance requests. It’s higher in London than in Paris, despite the 2024 Paralympics.

• Belfast Grand Central Station has become the first integrated bus and rail station in the UK & Ireland to provide the innovative 'NaviLens' navigation technology service, supporting blind and visually impaired people.

• The notorious broken lift at St Pancras will be out of service for refurbishment from 15 June. All platforms for Thameslink services are affected. And no, there will be no additional lift afterwards, which would be so desperately needed.

• Trains between Belfast and Dublin get level boarding. Hooray!

Something to watch

Last week, I was at the re:publica 2026 conference in Berlin. It’s a conference where digital and societal developments are discussed. I have been going to this conference for nearly two decades and nearly every year, and it’s a great source of inspiration for me. This year, my favourite talk was “Cory Doctorow – On Enshittification – and what can be done about it.”

Author and activist Cory Doctorow explores the decay of online platforms as they prioritise profit over user experience. Despite the current state of the internet, Doctorow expresses active hope, distinguishing it from passive optimism.

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• Bloomberg is searching for an Inclusion, Global Accessibility Lead

• The MI5 is searching for an Accessibility Specialist. Yes, really.

• Someone leaked plans to rebuild Euston station. London Centric about what the new HS2 station could look like, the battles behind the scenes, and why it could be overcrowded from the start. By the way, London Centric is really worth a read. Proper local journalism.

• TfL could take over the Heathrow Express train paths to Heathrow in 2028. After I changed trains twice Thursday night (at Terminal 2 and Whitechapel) to get to Woolwich at 2315, this is music to my ears. Let the Elizabeth Line run to Terminal 5 more often.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

The Telegraph published a story last week about dyslexic passengers using the Sunflower Lanyard to jump airport queues. It featured influencers coaching their followers titled “Helpful tip – Tell your airline you have ADHD!”, a woman sipping champagne in a Virgin Atlantic lounge before her wedding, and a tour of the cockpit. By the way, this has nothing to do with the sunflower lanyard, more with her wedding. The framing was exactly what you’d expect: scroungers, self-diagnosis, lifestyle perks. But the outrage is aimed at the wrong target, and it’s doing real damage to disabled people.

The Equality Act Doesn’t Require a Diagnosis

What the Telegraph article never mentions: under the Equality Act 2010, you do not need a clinical diagnosis to have a legally recognised disability. The Act defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. That’s a functional test, not a medical certificate.

Dyslexia meets that test. ADHD meets that test. Autism meets that test. And many of the people currently labelled as “self-diagnosed” by the Telegraph are not making it up. They are on NHS waiting lists that, depending on where they live, can mean a several-year wait, and not everyone has a spare £2000 to get a private diagnosis, only to be told by the NHS they don’t recognise it anyway.

The woman on the Virgin Atlantic flight to Montana who is in the Telegraph story said she felt “like a fraud” and was “going through the diagnostic process.” She’s not a fraudster. She’s someone navigating an overwhelming environment while waiting for an appointment. Condemning her for using a lanyard before her referral comes through is just ignorant of how the system works.

The Lanyard Was Never Meant to Do This Much Heavy Lifting

The Hidden Disabilities Sunflower scheme launched at Gatwick and is now used in 300 airports worldwide. The intention when starting the scheme was a discreet signal to staff that a passenger might need a bit more time, patience, or support. No fuss, no bureaucracy, no medical gatekeeping.

The problem is that what started as a signal has quietly become a gateway. Priority boarding. Fast-track security. Assistance lounge access. Assistance lounges are not lounges with champagne and free sandwiches. They are a glorified holding area for disabled passengers. I was never offered business lounge access just because I’m disabled. When I was in a business lounge, I had a business-class ticket or airline frequent-flyer status that allowed me access.
The way the sunflower lanyard is now used and displayed is not a disabled people’s problem. This is a design problem.

When a £1.30 lanyard becomes the key to reasonable adjustments that should have been provided as standard (for everyone who needs them, without requiring disclosure or standing in a queue), then the system was broken before anyone tried to game it. And the gaming, where it genuinely occurs, is a symptom of that broken system, not its cause.

The Scheme Gets the Architecture of Accessibility Backwards

Sheri Byrne-Haber, writing in her newsletter Access*Ability, makes the structural argument clear: access shouldn’t require a permission slip. The Sunflower Lanyard is exactly that. It asks disabled people to make themselves visible to announce health information to strangers across security lanes, check-in desks, and boarding gates in order to receive what should be standard treatment.

That’s a Social Model of disability failure hiding in plain sight. Airports are not designed for passengers with a range of impairments. They’re designed for the median traveller, and exceptions are bolted on afterwards. The lanyard is one of those bolted-on exceptions. Like, all bolt-on solutions shift the burden of dealing with a broken system onto the people the system was already failing.

Not every disabled passenger wants to wear a lanyard. The big majority doesn’t. Many have experienced harassment or worse after making their impairment visible. Asking someone to choose between public identification and going without support is not inclusion. It’s good branding of a lack of inclusion.

The Telegraph’s Story Is the Wrong Story

The headline here isn’t “self-diagnosed passengers exploit the system.” The real story is that airports have spent a decade accepting a voluntary opt-in symbol as a substitute for building inclusive processes from the ground up, and that this approach was always going to create exactly the pressure points the Telegraph is now writing about.

The reality at far too many airports is that people are left waiting far too long, unable to reach their gates, and stranded at jetways. In 2022, the CAA had to write to airports demanding action plans, threatening enforcement. Assistance at major UK airports has been, for years, a system that disabled people have had to route around rather than rely on. I personally don’t want to sit in a glorified waiting area (“Assistance lounges”) just to make processes easier. I prefer to spend some money at the airport and go shopping. The Sunflower Lanyard grew partly because the formal pre-notification system is so reliably unreliable at many airports, and people think their experience improves if people “just knew”.

Now the workaround is under attack, not because airports fixed the underlying problem. It puts every disabled person who depends on assistance and/or wears the lanyard in a culture war they didn’t start. And it is no coincidence that it’s another secondary theatre of war that disabled people are currently confronted with. The anger is pointed in exactly the wrong direction.

So, what to do now?

The Sunflower Lanyard is not an accessibility strategy. Use it as one optional tool within a holistic, proactively inclusive plan. Every frontline staff member should be trained to offer assistance without waiting for a visual cue. Lanyard or no lanyard, diagnosis or no diagnosis. “Is there anything I could do to make this easier for you?” should be the standard, not triggered by a sunflower symbol.

Fix your formal assistance channels. If disabled passengers are bypassing your pre-notification system (Really?) because it’s slow, opaque, or unreliable, the answer is not to crack down on workarounds. The answer is to make the formal route worth using. Fast, simple pre-notification. I want to mention British Airways, which has seriously improved its systems in recent years. I can basically request assistance, including sending them a battery notification, during ticket booking. One step. Not 10. Railway, are you listening? That’s how it’s done, not the n-th app.

Just to manage expectations: on the railway, assistance bookings don’t offer any real benefit, like queue-jumping or anything. It’s about train ramps and guiding for blind people. And the numbers increase sharply because the system is inaccessible. Still, the increase in bookings is good news! Yay, disabled people are travelling more.

Staff who actually know what to do when someone arrives, if you get that right, the lanyard stops being a special pass and becomes what it was designed to be: a quiet hint for a bit more patience.

Design systems that don’t require disclosure. A ramp doesn’t ask you to identify as a wheelchair user before you can use it. Subtitles don’t require proof of D/deafness. Accessible boarding processes, sensory-friendly environments, and forward-thinking assistance provisions work because they’re built in, not because someone was brave enough to wear a symbol. That’s the standard to aim for. Everything else is a workaround.

And if you’re writing or commissioning coverage of this issue (yes, I had a former life as a journalist), the story of a woman drinking champagne in an airport lounge celebrating her wedding is not the disability access story of 2026. The story is an industry that built a £1.30 system and called it inclusion. Hold them to a higher standard than that.

Some interesting links

• A wheelchair user in Australia calls for ‘common sense’ after a fine threat for using an accessible zone at an airport.

• Blue Badge holders and carers report being harassed, filmed and threatened by strangers who think they are faking their disability, reports the Guardian.

• More than a dozen new and updated accessibility improvements from this year’s Aircraft Interiors Expo, which put the spotlight firmly on airlines to reduce the barriers for disabled passengers.

• The ‘Enhanced’ Disability Rights Strategy, presented by the European Commission, falls short of our demands and of the European Union’s obligation to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, says the European Disability Forum.

Something to watch

Did you know that some of the finest accessibility features we use every day were first tested in Norwich, UK?

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• British Airways is searching for an Inclusion and Diversity Manager (12-month FTC)

• Transport for All is searching for a Chief Executive Officer

• I’m currently reading: - The Fraud: Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney, and the Crisis of British Democracy by Paul Holden - My rating: 5/5

• Do you want to meet for a coffee? I’m in Berlin at the re:publica conference next week and in Dublin at the “Advance accessibility in transport conference” in June

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

Between the Equality Act 2010 gaining traction and the European Accessibility Act arriving in 2025, an industry has formed around “accessibility.” Some is excellent; much is not. If you’re a procurement manager, DEI lead, or accessibility manager seeking value, you’re navigating a market with terrible signal-to-noise. This is about telling the difference before you sign the contract.

The accessibility industry has an integrity problem

The growing demand for accessibility services has attracted a category of suppliers that I’d describe as “accessibility hindering.” They know the vocabulary. They can spell WCAG. They will tell you they’re “inclusive” in the first thirty seconds of the call, but if you ask them about the social model, they go blank or tell you something about social care.

They often can’t explain what it’s like to board a train in a wheelchair, how wheelchair boarding works at airports, or what happens when screen readers encounter poorly structured tables. Nor can they show how a good website functions or why requiring complaints for “reasonable adjustments” is unreasonable.

This matters because accessibility work that isn’t grounded in lived experience and the social model of disability tends to deliver outputs that look great on paper but fail in real life. A training programme that is based on the medical model of disability, on pity and being patronising and medical, isn’t just useless, it’s actively harmful. A website redesign that passes an automated accessibility check but has never been tested by a screen reader user is a legal liability in disguise.

The problem is structural. As accessibility has moved up the corporate agenda, driven by legislation, litigation risk, and the slow but real shift in public expectations, the number of suppliers claiming expertise has grown far faster than the number that actually have it. There’s no regulated professional standard for “accessibility consultant” in the UK. Anyone can print it on a business card.

I’ve seen it so often: an organisation invests heavily in disability awareness, completes training, reports it, then nothing changes. The training focused on awareness, not change, and was delivered by people who never faced disabled people’s daily barriers.

What to actually look for

The first question to ask any training provider isn’t about their methodology, their delivery model, or their client list. It’s this: who are your trainers, and what is their direct experience of disability? Direct, not second-hand.

The best disability equality and accessibility training is delivered by disabled people. You need trainers who live with the barriers you’re asking staff to understand, not just those who know medical terms or conditions. Knowledge and experience are different things, and the gap between them is exactly where training tends to go wrong. Disabled trainers can answer questions non-disabled people can’t.

A training provider who states that their trainers are “very experienced” or “have worked extensively with disabled people” without addressing whether any of them are disabled deserves a follow-up. Being very experienced in working with a community is not the same as being part of it. This is what “Nothing About Us Without Us” actually means in practice: not as a slogan on a website, but as a procurement criterion.

Beyond who delivers the training, look hard at what it produces. Good disability equality training doesn’t finish with people feeling educated and vaguely well-intentioned. It ends with specific behaviour change: staff who know what to do differently and managers who understand their legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010 (or any national legislation).

Beware training that is only a one-off or an online module without a trainer present. Real learning about accessibility is a conversation, an activity, and something memorable. It needs to be revisited as the organisation evolves and as disabled people’s needs develop.

The other thing that makes me genuinely uneasy is training that relies heavily on “disability simulation” exercises like blindfolds, earplugs, wheelchairs for an afternoon. The research on these is pretty clear: they tend to increase pity and anxiety, not empathy and competence. They centre the non-disabled participant’s temporary discomfort rather than the disabled person’s actual experience. A good provider won’t lead with these, and if you ask them about it directly, they should be able to explain why they use or don’t use them and what the evidence says. Disability simulation is a clear sign that something is off. Equality starts with listening to and believing disabled people, not putting them in a wheelchair for an afternoon and clapping when participants manage the 1cm step at a convenience store.

Finally, and this is where it gets uncomfortable, ask about the provider’s own organisation. How many of their staff are disabled? That’s not just important for training providers; that’s important for every supplier that provides anything aimed at or used by disabled people. Go to disabled owned businesses. It often saves you a lot of trouble in the first place.

Web design agencies: where good intentions go to die

The digital accessibility space has a specific pathology that has gotten noticeably worse over the last few years, and it has a name: the overlay.

Accessibility overlays are widgets that sit on top of a website. It’s a small piece of code, a floating toolbar, and suddenly, according to the sales pitch, your site is compliant. They have names that sound reassuring. They have case studies. They have, in some cases, invested heavily and allocated significant marketing budgets. They don’t work.

The US Federal Trade Commission reached a $1 million settlement with an overlay company in 2025, finding it had misled businesses by marketing its widget as a guaranteed compliance tool. More than a thousand lawsuits were filed in a single year against companies using overlay tools, not despite using them, but partly because of them. Overlays often create new barriers for screen reader users by applying layers of interface that interrupt navigation. They don’t fix the underlying code. They put a cosmetic veneer over structural inaccessibility and call it done.

Any web design agency that responds to your accessibility brief by recommending an overlay or by describing automated scanning tools as the basis for their compliance work is not an agency with genuine digital accessibility expertise. Automated tools are useful starting points. They can reliably catch certain categories of error. But they catch, at best, around 30–40% of failures. The rest requires human judgement, and crucially, testing with disabled users.

A credible web design agency builds user testing with disabled people into their process as standard. If their proposal doesn’t mention it, ask directly. If their answer is vague or relies solely on automated tools, walk away.

Under the UK’s Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations, public sector websites must meet certain standards. Under the Equality Act 2010, private sector organisations have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, which, in practice, means delivering accessible digital services. With the European Accessibility Act now in force across EU member states, organisations trading across borders face a converging set of requirements. Inaccessible websites exclude disabled people. That is the point, and it should be the driver, not just the compliance risk.

So, after identifying common pitfalls, what are the key qualities of a good (web) agency?

They will have accessibility embedded from the beginning of a project. They will have a clear position on overlay tools. Ask them. Any hesitation or hedging tells you something.

They will be able to explain WCAG 2.2 success criteria in plain language rather than just referencing the document. They’ll know that “accessible” and “technically compliant” are not the same thing.

And critically, they will involve disabled people in testing. Not by proxy, not through a checklist, but by actually recruiting disabled users, e.g. people who use screen readers, switch access devices, voice input software and observing what happens when those users try to do things on the site you’re building.

The money question

I want to address the budget issue directly because it keeps coming up. Good accessibility services cost money. Disabled trainers with genuine expertise charge appropriately for that expertise. Web design agencies with real accessibility capabilities build that into their day rates. User testing with disabled participants costs money to recruit, facilitate, and analyse properly.

The cheapest providers are often cheap because they don’t do the hard work. An overlay subscription costs a few hundred pounds a year. A credible digital accessibility programme costs significantly more. The question isn’t which one is cheaper. It’s which one actually works and delivers, and which one treats disabled people as customers. Not as a compliance problem that has to be managed.

I find it genuinely baffling that organisations will spend substantial sums on leadership development, on rebrand projects, on staff away days, and then query the cost of accessibility work, which is both a legal obligation and a matter of basic dignity. But I’ve seen it enough that I’m no longer surprised. The question to ask yourself before you push back on a quote is: What is the human cost of a disabled customer, passenger, patient, or citizen being shut out of your service?

What To Do Now

First, require that any training provider disclose the proportion of their delivery team who are disabled and their position on disability simulation. Use those answers as a shortlist filter, not purely as background reading.

Second, ask your web agency or anyone who supplies something accessibility-relevant how they recruit and involve disabled users in accessibility testing. Treat non-specific or evasive answers the same way you’d treat a non-specific answer about data security.

Third, find out what your own organisation looks like from the outside. And ask a disabled member of staff or a disabled member of the public to describe their experience accessing your services. What they tell you will be more useful than any training programme or audit you could buy.

The accessibility market will continue to grow. The number of suppliers will continue to grow. The gap between genuine expertise and confident claims will, if anything, widen before it narrows. Your job isn’t to find the most convincing, cheapest supplier. It’s to find the one whose work will still look credible six months after implementation, when the disabled people your organisation serves try to use what’s been built.

That’s the standard. Hold suppliers to it.

Some interesting links

• IATA has published non-binding guidance on the transport of assistance dogs (service dogs is the terminology they are using) on aircraft. Spoiler alert: It’s not revolutionary, and I think the document would have benefited from a more social model approach (and wording). The annex could be helpful to look up rules in different countries.

• The Office of Rail and Road has put nationalised train operator South Western Railway (SWR) on formal notice over its poor record of delivering assistance to disabled passengers, accepting SWR's improvement plan submitted in January 2026, but making clear it will be held to account for delivery. The plan commits SWR to a series of fixes over the next 12 months, including better data tracking, clearer staff ownership, and stronger training, with the first set of actions due by the end of April 2026. ORR is requiring monthly progress updates and has scheduled four review meetings running through to April 2027.

• The Airbus Airspace U Suite, tested in the air last month and presented at the Aircraft Interiors Expo, could be the future of air travel for wheelchair users, writes John Morris.

Something to watch

I really thought these times were over, but apparently not. Deaf passengers are still put in a wheelchair at airports because because because…. I don’t know (if have issues watching it here or you don’t have TikTok, scroll down for the video in this article).

@ebrookemackI am no longer deaf. Bless the wheelchair Delta supplied me with @delta #delta

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• Network Rail is searching for an Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Specialist.

• DfT Operator (the company that owns nationalised train operators) is seeking a Culture, Engagement and Inclusion Manager.

• HMRC is searching for an Accessibility Lead.

• Sorry for taking up space - A reflection on over-apologising, approval-seeking, and the hidden cost of constantly trying not to inconvenience anyone.

• I’m currently reading: Be your own bestie by Misha Brown - My rating: 4/5

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

There’s a graphic by Robbie Crow on LinkedIn, the BBC’s Strategic Disability Lead, doing the rounds right now. It splits disability allyship into two columns: what active inclusion actually looks like, and what performative allyship looks like instead. I’ve seen versions of this idea before, but this is really a good one. Gaslighting. Tokenism. Avoidance. Silence. These aren’t edge cases. These are so common, unfortunately.

“I Don’t See You As Disabled” Is Not a Compliment

Let’s start with the gaslighting, because it’s the one that really gets on my nerves.

A lot of people think that “I don’t see you as disabled” is a compliment. But erasing a key part of my identity isn’t nice. At best, it’s thoughtless. I actually appreciate it if people think one or two steps ahead when they realise I’m a wheelchair user. There is no need to ignore that. It’s a part of me. So they don’t book the restaurant in the basement without a lift, they acknowledge I’m disabled and plan accordingly. If they don’t see me as disabled, disaster is inevitable.

Crow’s graphic pairs this with “everyone is a bit autistic”, the classic move of universalising a specific experience until it becomes meaningless. The practical effect of both phrases is the same: they let the speaker off the hook while erasing a whole group of people. If disability is invisible, or if we’re all a bit the same, really, then there’s nothing structural to change. No lift to install. No accessible toilet to budget for. No new trains to order.

In transport, I hear this version constantly. “Our passengers don’t really have a problem with the current setup”, usually said by someone who has never used assistance before or travelled with their older mother once, in a wheelchair, super off-peak, during summer holidays. The problem has been erased, so no action is required.

The Equality Act 2010 doesn’t offer that comfort. Disability discrimination law doesn’t care whether you think you see disability or not. It cares whether barriers exist and if they are reasonably removed.

Tokenism Is a Policy, Not an Accident

Tokenism is often mistaken for inclusion. I’ve sat on advisory panels where disabled people were a muted audience to endorse decisions that have already been made. That’s not consultation. That’s performance.

The research backs this up. A 2025 reflection for UK Disability History Month put it plainly: “At best, an organisation might get one token disabled person, usually someone who’s exceptionally privileged, and think that’s enough.”

This matters in transport. The UK’s Transport Select Committee said in its Access Denied report that disabled people must be “seen, heard and acknowledged” in reform, not added as an afterthought. But the reality is stations remain inaccessible, and campaigners warn it could take a century to make all UK stations step-free at the current investment rate. Meanwhile, advisory groups still fill annual reports of operators who haven’t improved.

Tokenism functions as an alibi. “We consulted disabled people” is the sentence that ends conversations that should be starting them. The right question is not whether you consulted disabled people. It’s whether anything changed as a result.

Silence Is a Choice With Consequences

The right column of Crow’s graphic ends with silence: staying quiet when confronted with ableist behaviour or jokes. This is where I want to talk directly to the non-disabled people reading this.

When bystanders stay silent about ableist behaviour, disabled people often see that as endorsement, not neutrality. This has consequences on so many levels.

It’s the same with avoidance: staying away from conversations about disability because they make you feel uncomfortable when they can be such a chance to learn and to overcome the negative feelings. To challenge the perception. What’s needed is proper engagement. That’s a reason to lean in, not back away.

In 2026, with DEI under political pressure in both the US and UK, silence comes with a cost. We really need allies now. Organisations quietly dropped their disability inclusion commitments when DEI became inconvenient. The programmes that disappeared first were the ones that were never structurally embedded. They were window dressing. It became obvious as never before what was always lacking: The power given to disabled people to shape decisions, not just validate them.

What To Do Now

The four active inclusion behaviours in Crow’s graphic (self-reflection, active listening, continuous learning, proactive advocacy) are not soft skills. They’re structural commitments.

Self-reflection means asking who is shaping your accessibility strategy? Are disabled people in the room from the start, or are they invited to comment on a finished product? If the answer is the latter, that’s not inclusion. That’s a review process with a tiny little bit of diversity.

Active listening means suspending your instinct to explain or justify when a disabled person describes a barrier. The planned and agreed-upon process and the lived reality are not the same; there wouldn’t be a single failed assist on the railway, and every airport would meet assistance time standards with 100% success. Hear the reality first.

Continuous learning means continuing after the induction. Understand what the Equality Act 2010 actually requires. Read some court judgments or Doug Paulley’s blog. You will be surprised. Follow disabled voices, not just the ones who are comfortable to follow.

Proactive advocacy is action. When a colleague makes an ableist remark, say something. When an accessibility concern is raised in a meeting and pushed aside, notice that. When a procurement decision deprioritises accessibility because of cost or laziness, push back.

None of this is complicated. All of it requires deciding that the discomfort of action is preferable to the comfort of inaction.

Some interesting links

• A court case in Leverkusen / Germany, descended into chaos after a hearing about a disabled man being forcibly removed from a train.

  Ilias Emmanuil, a wheelchair user and accessibility activist from Leverkusen, was travelling on a night train from Cologne to Linz on 4 September 2024. Despite having a valid ticket, booked through the Austrian rail operator ÖBB’s app, which indicated wheelchairs were permitted, the train manager refused to let him travel because the train had no wheelchair space or accessible toilet. Emmanuil had already boarded with help from fellow passengers and refused to leave voluntarily, arguing his removal was discriminatory.

  Three police officers were called. What followed was filmed by another passenger: after several minutes of struggle, police used pain compliance techniques, restrained him face-down, handcuffed him, and carried him off the train while he screamed.

  The incident caused significant delays to the night train.

  In court, Emmanuil faced charges of resisting arrest, making insulting remarks to officers, and publishing the video on Instagram with the officers’ faces visible. He admitted the insults but attributed them to the pain of the restraint. He also produced a screenshot from the ÖBB app showing wheelchairs were allowed on the train.

  The hearing collapsed when Emmanuil’s lawyer, Christian Mertens, started shouting at the judge after the judge acknowledged the train operator’s right to enforce house rules on its own service. A spectator in a wheelchair then began screaming in the public gallery and refused to leave. The judge adjourned.

  The whole incident was arguably avoidable. Emmanuil can walk short distances and use a standard toilet, so the train manager could simply have found him a seat and left the wheelchair somewhere. But Germany has no Equality Act or ADA comparable to UK or US legislation. The German article is here.

• Assistance staff at Stansted Airport are planning to strike over a pay rise worth the equivalent of ‘a tin of beans per week’, says the Unite trade union. Their employer, ABM, said this calculation is incorrect and that it would continue negotiations.

• The European Disability Forum published its list of concrete proposals to improve accessibility in rail transport. The document aims to influence the ongoing revision of the TSI-PRM regulation. It sets minimum accessibility standards for trains and stations. TSI-PRM stands for “Technical Specifications for Interoperability relating to Accessibility” of the EU’s rail system.

• “We’re Not Done Yet” - Apple’s Head Of Accessibility On 50 Years Of Making Technology For Everyone, and a nice look back on their accessibility marketing campaigns.

• Bus passenger satisfaction levels in the UK have once again risen, with journeys in England up by 2% to 85%, and journeys in Scotland up by 5% to 91%, according to the latest annual 2025 Your Bus Journey survey from Transport Focus. But passengers are also experiencing a widening gap between disabled and non-disabled passengers, with satisfaction levels at 83% and 87% respectively, indicating that improvements to bus services are not being felt equally. For many disabled passengers, barriers in accessibility and confidence in travelling may still shape how journeys are experienced.

Something to watch

Here are things disabled people are expected to do that non-disabled people would never be asked. Once you notice them, you cannot unsee them.

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• Dr Martens (Yes, the shoes) is searching for a Global Head of Diversity, Inclusion & Employee Experience.

• What does it mean for a disabled person to practice continuous vigilance, and why is it necessary? Kelly Mack explores research and articles on the topic.

• Stella Young gets her own statue. If you don’t know who she was, watch her TED talk.

• What I’ve just read: Kurt - by Sarah Kuttner (a German book) - My rating: 4/5

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published its Guiding Principles for Accessible Transport, and if you work in transport, you should take note. There are seven principles in total, covering everything from communication to complaints to continuous improvement. They apply to England and Wales. I want to focus on the first one, as it’s the most important and the solution to many of the issues we’re facing today. It’s one where the transport sector still gets it spectacularly wrong: Active Involvement.

The principle states that disabled and older people should be “closely consulted and actively involved in decisions affecting the accessibility of services, including at the start of new projects and during reviews of existing services.” It also states that evidence from disabled and older people should inform assessments of the potential and actual impacts of transport policies and practices.

Nothing About Us, Without Us

None of this should be new. And yet, here we are. I’ve written before that the most important voices in accessibility conversations are those who are disabled. I find it baffling how many organisations still separate the topics of accessibility and disability from each other, as if you can design accessible services without involving the people who actually need them.

They have non-disabled teams, they don’t get disabled people involved, and they think they’re doing something good, but it doesn’t work like that. If you’re lucky, project teams try to follow the rules and guidelines. If you don’t understand what the rules are for practically, it’s easy to fulfil them, but make mistakes. E.g., the 1.50m next to an accessible toilet is needed to transfer from a wheelchair onto the toilet. If you put a hand dryer there or a bin or whatever, the whole space becomes unusable. It’s an empty space with a purpose.

The EHRC putting Active Involvement as Principle Number One is not a coincidence. It’s a signal. It tells you that they consider genuine engagement with disabled and older people to be the foundation on which everything else rests. Not communication, not complaints handling, not data collection, involvement.

And the word “active” matters. This is not about sending out a survey once a year and ticking a box. It’s not about having an accessibility panel that meets twice a year over biscuits, where everyone agrees and never influences a single decision. Active involvement means disabled and older people are in the room when decisions are made. At the start. Not after the plans are drawn up, not after the procurement contract is signed, not after the new app has been built. At the start.

The Consultation Theatre

Let’s be honest about what happens in many organisations. There is a consultation. Disabled people are invited. They share their experiences, their frustrations, their needs. Notes are taken. Everyone feels good about the process. And then nothing happens. The feedback disappears into a report that no one reads, or, worse, gets cherry-picked to support decisions that were already made.

I’ve seen this pattern so many times and there is a term for it: performative engagement. Inviting disabled people, asking for their demands and needs, and then doing nothing except using this engagement to tell the world there was engagement with disabled people.

That creates a really bad culture for stakeholder engagement in the long term because people will be less and less willing to give input if they feel it’s not appreciated and, in fact, abused. Or you always invite the same disabled people where you know they nod to everything. No critical friend approach, approbation by default.

The EHRC’s principle challenges this directly. It doesn’t just say “consult.” It says “closely consulted and actively involved.” There’s a difference between asking someone what they think and giving them genuine influence over the outcome. If your engagement process doesn’t change anything, it’s not engagement. It’s theatre.

What Active Involvement Actually Looks Like

So what does genuine active involvement look like in practice? Here are some indicators:

• Disabled people are involved from the design stage. Not brought in to review a finished product, but included when the brief is written. If you’re redesigning your booking system, disabled customers should be shaping the requirements, not testing a finished product that was designed without them.

• There is a feedback loop. When disabled people give input, they can see what happened with it. Did it influence the decision? If not, why not? Transparency builds trust. Silence destroys it.

• The voices are diverse. Disability is not a monolith. A wheelchair user, a blind person, a Deaf person, someone with a learning disability, an autistic person and an older person with reduced mobility will all have different needs and perspectives. If your panel consists of one or two people who are easy to work with and never challenge you, you’re picking the convenient voices, not the representative ones. And make sure they have the right approach to disability. Social Model of disability, not the medical model. No service, product, or organisation will improve for disabled people with a medical model worldview. That’s a hill I will die on.

• Involvement is resourced. Asking people to give their time, expertise, and emotional energy for free is not respectful. If you pay your consultants, pay your disabled advisors and consultants as well. Their lived experience is expertise, and it should be valued as such.

• It’s ongoing, not a one-off. Active involvement is not a project with a start and end date. It’s a continuous relationship. Services change and new barriers emerge. The conversation should never stop.

• Hire disabled people into your teams. Seriously, I still don’t understand why I don’t meet more disabled people in transport teams. And not just the accessibility team, the project team lead and the IT manager too. It can improve not only the projects but the company culture as well. If you don’t know where to start, try Evenbreak.

• And to the disabled readers: Please don’t participate in window dressing. Getting paid is a really good indicator of whether the company is serious or just doing window dressing, but not the only one. Window dressing is actually more harmful than doing nothing. So please, don’t take part in it.

The Legal Backbone

The EHRC’s guiding principles are not law in themselves, but they are informed by equality and human rights law, and the EHRC has made it clear that it will use these principles in its engagement with the sector. That’s a polite way of saying: we will measure you against this.

The Equality Act 2010 already requires service providers to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 9, requires equal access to transport. Active involvement of disabled people is not a nice-to-have. It’s embedded in the legal framework that applies to organisations in the UK already. What the EHRC has done with these guiding principles is translate those legal obligations into practical expectations.

The Uncomfortable Truth

Here’s the uncomfortable truth for accessibility managers: if your organisation has been doing engagement badly, or not at all, this principle will expose that. And if you’ve been doing it well, this is your moment to demonstrate it.

I strongly believe that if accessibility work and initiatives are not based on the social model of disability, they cause more harm than good. The social model says that people are disabled by barriers in society, not by their impairments. Active involvement is the social model in action. You can’t identify and remove barriers if you don’t talk to the people who experience them. And you can’t talk to them meaningfully if you don’t share power, listen properly, and act on what you hear.

The EHRC has also made something else clear: regulators and scrutiny bodies have a responsibility to use equality data to compare performance across the sector and bring operators together to promote good practice.

What To Do Now

I would recommend to any organisation that wants to improve their customer experience to start with Active Involvement and ask themselves honestly: are disabled and older people genuinely influencing our decisions, or are we just doing that because a regulator told us so?

Audit the current engagement. Who is involved? When are they involved? What happens with their input? If these questions can’t get answered clearly, that’s the starting point.

Talk to disabled people. Not at them, not about them, but with them. As equal partners and critical friends. That’s what Active Involvement means, and the EHRC has just made it Principle Number One for a reason.

Some interesting links

• Five more London Underground stations have been given a second chance to become step-free, if Transport for London can secure the funding. The stations considered are Barkingside, Brent Cross, Preston Road, Queensbury and Totteridge & Whetstone, writes Ian Mansfield.

• The Law Commission has launched a review of the current laws governing the accessibility of transport for disabled people across England and Wales. The objective of the review is to make recommendations to simplify and consolidate the legal framework and supporting end-to-end journeys by disabled people across Great Britain.

• More than half of UK local authorities are finding it difficult to make public electric vehicle charging infrastructure accessible to disabled drivers, according to new research from charge point operator Believ.

Something to watch

What Gareth Dennis says… This is how transport disables people.

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• The BBC is searching for a Senior Accessibility Specialist for the Accessibility and Design Integration team, nationwide.

• LNER is searching for an Accessibility Improvement Manager - 24 month Secondment in York.

• Saying No Is Disability Advocacy: Why People with Disabilities Must Stop Over-Explaining and Start Setting Boundaries - “Disability policy has advanced historically not through quiet acceptance but through organised pressure, litigation, protest, and sustained narrative change.”

• What I’ve just read: Come what may - An uplifting guide to navigating hard times from the UK’s leading expert on recovery by Lucy Easthope - My rating: 4/5

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

I have noticed a particular pattern in transport, and once you see it, you cannot unsee it. A wheelchair user has a failed assist. The first question is “Have you booked?” A Deaf passenger misses an announcement about a platform change. The response: “Well, it was clearly communicated.” A blind passenger needs assistance, but the ticket office is not staffed. The response: “The staff was on the platform; he could have searched for us.”

Notice what all of these responses have in common. The system fails. The passenger is blamed.

This is a pattern. It is one of the most damaging dynamics in transport accessibility today when it comes to disabled passengers.

What Blame-Shifting Actually Looks Like

Blame-shifting in transport rarely arrives as outright hostility. It is far more subtle than that, which is part of why it persists. It hides inside policies, scripts, and processes that were designed to protect the organisation rather than serve the passenger.

It sounds like this:

“You should have pre-booked assistance.”

“Our staff followed the correct procedure.”

“The information was available on our website.”

“We can’t be held responsible for our agency staff or contractors.”

None of them is an acceptable response to a disabled passenger who was unable to travel, was stranded on a platform or on a train or plane, or was publicly humiliated in front of other passengers.

What these responses do is shift the burden of a systemic failure onto the individual who experienced it. They tell the disabled customer: the problem is you and your needs, your timing, your lack of preparation. They frame disability as an inconvenience to be managed, rather than a reality the system has a legal and moral obligation to accommodate.

This is the medical model of disability in action. It treats the passenger as the problem to be fixed, rather than examining the barriers the environment has created. And in transport and aviation, where the social model of disability should be the foundation of every accessibility strategy, this is a fundamental failure of understanding.

The Real Cost of Blame

The consequences of this pattern are far more serious than a bad customer experience. They are multi-layered.

It stops people from travelling. When disabled passengers are repeatedly told, directly or indirectly, that their needs are an inconvenience, they stop travelling. Not because they cannot travel, but because the emotional, mental, and logistical costs of navigating a system that blames them for its own failures become too high. This is not a minor inconvenience. This is a restriction of freedom, independence, and participation in society.

It silences complaints. One of the most damaging effects of blame culture is that it discourages disabled passengers from raising concerns at all. If every complaint is met with a response that implies the passenger did something wrong, people stop complaining. And when complaints stop, organisations believe the problem has been solved. It hasn’t. The people affected have simply given up.

It corrupts data. Last week, I received a feedback questionnaire about assistance from a train operator, in which the first question already indirectly blamed the customer. The first question asked if I was 20 minutes before departure at the station. Yes or No? The second question asked if I made a staff member aware that I needed assistance. That was the moment I stopped filling out the questionnaire; even so, I was 20 minutes before departure at the station, and I informed the train operator via WhatsApp that I had arrived via the accessible entrance because it wasn’t near the station building.

When a blame-shifting culture suppresses complaints and even praise (I had a seamless journey on the day the questionnaire referred to), the data becomes flawed. Leaders make decisions based on a picture that does not reflect the lived experience of disabled passengers. Improvements are not made because the problem is not visible, not because it does not exist.

It damages trust permanently. A disabled passenger who has been blamed for a system failure does not forget it. They tell others. They share it on social media. They factor it into every future travel decision. The reputational and commercial cost of blame culture is real, even if it is rarely measured.

Why Organisations Do This

It would be easy to assume that blame-shifting is always malicious. In my experience, it rarely is. It is usually the product of something more subtle: a culture that has never been challenged to think differently. That never uses the experience of a non-disabled traveller as a baseline for what disabled passengers should be able to expect. Nobody asks non-disabled people to show up 20 minutes before departure. We respect non-disabled people’s time.

Staff who respond with blame are often trapped in a failing system. Policies that place the burden on the passenger were never discussed with disabled customers. Customer service processes were designed for efficiency, not equity. And somewhere in the chain, nobody stopped to think: what does this look like from the perspective of the person we are failing? I’ve seen written responses to failed assists that made my blood freeze due to the lack of empathy and the level of defensiveness.

This is why the “Nothing About Us, Without Us” principle is not just a slogan. It is a structural necessity. When disabled people are not in the room where decisions are made, the decisions will reflect that absence. There is also an organisational incentive problem. Admitting that a system failed a disabled passenger means admitting liability, accepting responsibility, and committing to change. Blaming the passenger is easier, cheaper, and requires nothing. Until organisations are held accountable through regulation, through public scrutiny, through legal challenge, many will continue to choose the easier path.

What Genuine Accountability Looks Like

The alternative to blame is not simply being nicer. It is a structural shift in how organisations understand their responsibility to disabled passengers.

It means training staff not just in what the procedure is, but in why the procedure exists, how it helps disabled customers, not just because the regulator says so. It means complaint processes that centre the experience of the disabled customer, not the organisation’s defence.

Most importantly, it means treating disabled passengers as equal partners in the design and evaluation of transport services and not as problems to be managed.

The question transport operators need to ask themselves is not “did we follow the process?” It is “did the passenger get where they needed to go, with their dignity intact and on a level comparable to non-disabled people?”

If the answer to that question is no, then the process failed. Not the passenger.

Thank you, everyone!

Thank you to everyone who took part in my questionnaire. You can still fill it in if you haven’t done so. It gave me some insights into who you are and what you expect from this newsletter. It also gave me good reassurance not to change much, because you are generally quite pleased readers. You like the length of the newsletter in general. So I will not add much. I will add one flexible category, which I call “Bits, bobs and jobs”. That’s where you will find any off-topic links, which I dare to share nonetheless, and some jobs I stumble across and where I think this could interest you. Blind readers asked me to make the link descriptions a bit longer. I will do that as well.

Have a great time!

Christiane Link

Some interesting links

• Doug Paulley does it again. He is preparing to formally object to Kent County Council’s decision to approve the diversion of two public footpaths over a proposed railway bridge that will be inaccessible to disabled people. The bridge is intended to link major housing developments on either side of the railway line, including access to a new primary school, community facilities and local amenities, but Network Rail wants to save money and add barriers to the world. They didn’t learn from Copmanthorpe, where Network Rail spent £437,000 on an inquiry to push for an inaccessible footbridge they didn’t build at the end.

• Ten years after DISABLED. #SayTheWord went viral on social media, Lawrence Carter-Long reflects on the lessons learned: “Naming disability is not impolite. Nor is it etiquette. It is infrastructure. It is accountability. It is ownership. We do not say the word just to be provocative. We say the word because treating disability as unspeakable has never made anyone safer.”

• It is impossible to simulate the experience of impairment and disability in all its complexity, nuance and richness, says Robyn Hunt in “Confessions of a reformed disability simulation enthusiast”.

Something to watch

Amy was left on a train, missed a work appointment, and the whole journey took over 90 minutes instead of 38 minutes.

Bits, Bobs & Jobs

• “I Swear” has started on Netflix. One of the best films I've watched in decades. If you don’t have Netflix, it’s also on YouTube and Prime for around £4.

• East Midlands Airport is searching for a Customer Service and Assisted Travel Manager. I’m biased, but I can say they are an amazing team.

• Investment company Royal London is searching for an Accessibility Consultant (customer experience) and an Accessibility Specialist (digital); both positions close this week.

• What I’ve just read: Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York, by Andrew Lownie - My rating: 4/5

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

Hello everyone,

I’ve been writing The Accessible Link for nearly three years; Over 700 people have subscribed, and ca 1000 are reading it every month. You know that my mission is to bridge the Customer Experience (CX) and Accessibility, based on the social model of disability. For too long, these two areas were treated separately, which meant a missed opportunity to improve both.

My goal has always been to prove that they are, in fact, the same thing. Good accessibility is good customer experience. For disabled people, inclusion and accessibility aren’t a ‘nice-to-have’ or an add-on; they are mandatory for a functioning service.

Customer-focused and efficient

I write this as a consultant who loves a customer-focused and efficient approach, but also as a journalist who loves a good topic. And, of course, I write it from the perspective of a wheelchair user who simply wants to get from A to B without having to file a formal complaint after being overcarried to C.

I thoroughly enjoy dissecting the social model of disability, challenging the railway industry to do better, and championing the innovations that actually make life easier. But here is the thing about writing a newsletter: it can sometimes feel a bit like broadcasting over a tannoy system in an empty terminal. I send these thoughts out into the ether, and while I can see the open rates (thank you for reading!), I don’t always know what is going on inside your heads.

Do you enjoy what you’re reading?

I am not psychic. If I were, I would have predicted every failed assist I’ve ever encountered. Because I cannot read minds, I need to ask you directly. I want The Accessible Link to be as useful, thought-provoking and actionable as possible for you. Whether you are an industry leader, a fellow accessibility professional, a disabled person, or someone simply interested in the topics of this newsletter, your view matters.

I am conscious that “can you spare 5 minutes for a survey” is usually the most dreaded sentence in the English language. However, I promise this isn’t a corporate tick-box exercise.

I am asking because I want to know:

• Do you enjoy what you are reading? Should I change anything?

• Is the balance right?

• What keeps you up at night? What are the burning accessibility issues in your sector that I haven’t covered yet?

Essentially, I am hiring you, my readers, as my consultants for five minutes.

So, I have put together a short questionnaire. It is painless and in parts a bit funny, I promise.

Please click here to tell me what you think.

Thank you for sticking with me, for reading, and for caring about making the world a more accessible place.

All the best,

Christiane Link

Some interesting links

• The Leashed Advocate vs. The Unleashed Advocate, an interesting text about power dynamics in advocating.

• Oh mon dieu! The metro in Montreal in Canada has only 30 accessible stations. That’s not even 50% of stations. So disabled people went to the Supreme Court. And lost.

• TfL did it again. They branded their wayfinding for money. This time for Heineken. And create barriers.

Something to watch

BBC London on floating bus stops and the issues blind people face when travelling by bus.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

Whenever I leave the house, it feels a bit like playing a Super Mario game in real life, especially when I travel by train and have to change trains several times. I have the feeling I’m jumping over humps, book assistance, requesting ramps, and coordinating onward travel and then sometimes it’s still not enough, and I have to start the level again. Last week, I went on a business trip from St Pancras to East Midlands Parkway.

East Midlands Parkway is a strange station. It’s big and well-developed, in the middle of nowhere. It has no public transport connections and only a large car park. This means I have to book a community call bus called “Notts bus”. I book it well in advance. Actually a brilliant service, accessible but popular (which can be a problem for short-term bookings).

Delay? Not a problem normally

Normally, I don’t get nervous or angry about train delays. It’s actually the least of my problems when travelling. But this time the delay was so bad that I would miss my booked Notts bus. I tried to re-book the bus, but it was fully booked for the day. The only option was a Notts bus arriving two and a half hours later. Accessible taxis are difficult to get in this area, especially during the school run. I didn’t want to wait at East Midlands Parkway station for so long. So, I decided to go to Nottingham instead and take a bus to my hotel. Another massive delay, but an accessible option.

I had booked assistance for East Midlands Parkway, so I WhatsApped East Midlands Railway for help. The train was overcrowded, and the conductor couldn’t reach me. And I had no way to make her aware of my problem. I was stuck in the wheelchair space and had trouble getting even to the toilet because of the crowd.

While waiting for their response, an announcement was made that our train would no longer stop at East Midlands Parkway. Passengers bound for East Midlands Parkway should get off at Leicester for a connection to their destination. So all non-disabled people left the train at Leicester to catch another train for East Midlands Parkway and other stations. Even if I wanted, I couldn’t. Still trapped in the wheelchair space.

East Midlands Railway never responded to my cry for help on WhatsApp, but Twitter was more fruitful. They received the same message as the WhatsApp team:

“Good afternoon, EMR team, I think I need your help, please. I’m a wheelchair user on the very delayed 1405 STP to East Midlands Parkway. There is no scheduled public transport from EMP. Therefore, I booked a community bus, which I can’t reschedule because it’s fully booked this afternoon. Could you please arrange for me to go to Nottingham instead and get ramp assistance there, because I can get accessible onward travel from there. The train is overcrowded. Here is no conductor.”

And the first response was:

“Good afternoon, Christiane. Do you currently have Passenger Assistance booked?”

By that time, you might have heard a little cry from the wheelchair space. “Yes”, I wrote, but for East Midlands Parkway, not Nottingham,” I said, exercising my self-control. No question is more irrelevant in such a situation than asking whether the assistance was booked for a passenger who had already boarded. If a wheelchair user is stuck on a train, help them and don’t start with railway red tape.

And why is that not a proactive process anyway? Why do I have to find a way to contact the train operator? They know I’m on the train. They boarded me. I booked assistance. They know I need help because the arranged assistance is obsolete when they cancel my stop.

More Red Tape

They then asked for the assistance booking number. By that time, I had given up. I told them they had my name (there is only one person with my name in the UK) and my train. Then they asked for my email address and mobile number. It was unbelievable. Then, like a miracle, the conductor appeared. The aisle was empty after Leicester. Many people had left as requested through the loudspeakers.

I stopped her in her way, and she asked: “Are you okay?” And I said, “Actually, no. I’m going to East Midlands Parkway, but this train isn’t anymore, and I was trapped here, and even if I wanted to, I couldn’t get off at Leicester, and nobody in Nottingham knows I’m coming.” She was very lovely. She called her colleagues to arrange ramp assistance at Nottingham.

In the meantime, the Twitter team responded. They had finally realised that I couldn’t get to East Midlands Parkway. They had also called Nottingham to get me off the train. “However, for any alternative arrangements after you arrive in Nottingham, you would need to speak to the station staff directly.” A single word of reassurance or even a sorry? Nope. By then, I had already spent an hour trying to get help from them.

The Deutsche Bahn Experience

When we finally left the train, another passenger, who had listened to my conversation with the conductor (obviously me with a German accent), said to me, “This was a Deutsche Bahn-like experience, wasn’t it?” I laughed.

And when I finally saw the man with the ramp at Nottingham, Super Mario appeared in my head and said, “Thank you so much for playing my game!”

Some interesting links

• If the culture of the railway industry towards disabled people doesn’t change, nothing will. If you work in railway, please read this. Your industry body is a bit off-track.

• It is impossible to simulate the experience of impairment and disability in all its complexity, nuance and richness, says Robyn Hunt. A text against disability simulations in the workplace and everywhere.

• Veteran Taiwanese singer Zheng Zhihua’s viral post about struggling to board a flight at Shenzhen Airport sparked a debate in China over accessibility for disabled people.

• Accessible travel is often framed as all-or-nothing: either a traveller needs a wheelchair, or they don’t. This couple clearly explains why this is a wrong approach for airlines, airports, and travel destinations.

Something to read (and watch)

The Spinal Injuries Association published the results of the Travel With Confidence challenge, documenting the real-world challenges wheelchair users and people with limited mobility face every day.

Something to watch

I don’t understand why platform-train interfaces like these (that’s the official term for the area between the train and the platform) are still permitted. It’s not safe.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

Britain’s railway stations have 1,377 passenger lifts. Yes, that’s quite a lot, but not enough. And if you wonder if they are reliable, here comes the Office of Rail and Road’s latest statistical gift: the Passenger Lifts at Stations report for April to October 2025.

Spoiler alert: It’s a mixed bag of marginal improvements.

The Good News

Let’s start with the good news. Britain gained a net 50 lifts since October 2024. 50 whole lifts across the entire network. At this rate, we’ll have full step-free access in hundreds of years.

During the reporting period (April to October 2025), 33 new lifts opened at 17 stations. However, one was a replacement, and six were transferred to Transport for London, resulting in a net gain of 26 lifts at railway stations over seven months.

When Lifts Decide to Take a Break

Here’s where things get interesting. There were 5,550 lift faults recorded between April and October 2025, a 6% increase on the previous year. That’s 4.03 faults per lift, up from 3.96.

If railway lifts were employees, they’d be on a performance improvement plan by now.

The report helpfully breaks down the causes:

• 60% wear and tear (aka if you don’t replace and maintain them on time, this happens)

• 27% misuse and vandalism (yes, some people are evil)

• 13% external factors (yay, we can blame the British weather)

The average time to repair fell by 11% to 19.4 hours, which sounds impressive until you realise that’s still nearly a full day of a lift being out of service. And 128 faults put lifts out of service for over a week. That’s 128 times that disabled passengers, older travellers, parents with pushchairs, and anyone with heavy luggage were told, “Sorry, take the stairs or find another route.”

Trapped

Now for the entrapment statistics. There were 369 lift entrapments between April and October 2025. That’s down 7% from the previous year, which the report presents as good news.

The average response time fell to 44 minutes. Forty-four minutes.

That’s enough time to listen to Pink Floyd’s album "The Dark Side of the Moon" in its entirety.

Then there are twenty-five entrapments of more than 75 minutes. Being stuck in a lift for over an hour at a railway station? No, thank you.

The Context

Passenger journeys increased by 8% during this period. So more people are using the railways, which presumably means more people are using the lifts, which means the lifts are working harder, which means... they’re breaking down more. Yes, infrastructure needs to be properly maintained, renewed and expanded to meet demand.

They also note that they don’t hold data on lift reliability for individual stations. How convenient. Especially for St Pancras and Dartford. This means that if you want to know whether your local station’s lift is reliable, it’s not visible in these statistics. Ignorance is bliss.

The Bigger Picture

Britain is legally required to make its railway network accessible. So I’m struggling a bit, celebrating a slight improvement in entrapment response times as if we’ve landed on the moon.

The Access for All programme continues to move at the pace of the lift at Liverpool Station (the Londoners know). Meanwhile, disabled people continue to plan their journeys around which stations have working lifts, checking and rechecking before they leave home, always with a backup plan for when, not if, something goes wrong.

The Bottom Line

The ORR’s report is full of percentages and comparisons to previous years, highlighting an incremental improvement. But incremental improvement on a fundamentally inadequate baseline is still inadequate.

Yes, it’s good that response times are falling. Yes, it’s good that we’re adding lifts (at a glacial pace). But this is a very low bar for celebrating.

Until every station is step-free, until lifts are reliable enough that passengers don’t need to check their status before travelling, until being trapped for 44 minutes is considered “unacceptable” rather than “improved,” we’re not done.

Britain’s railways were built in the Victorian era, a fact very often stated to excuse the lack of accessibility. It’s time we stopped maintaining accessibility features with a Victorian-era attitude. If my fellow British-German, Prince Albert, got the windows of Buckingham Palace cleaned from both sides in 1837, I’m sure we can improve lift reliability and availability in 2026.

P.S.: My Cricklewood Saga from the last newsletter got a mention in the printed “RAIL Magazine” (that’s industry press in the UK), and they interviewed me about the Access for All programme. So get a copy if you see it anywhere.

Christiane Link

Some interesting links

• Four in five blind people struggle with the gap at UK train stations. Level boarding would solve that.

• Research finds that 48% of UK websites need accessibility improvements, with the travel and hospitality sectors most affected, while councils lead in digital inclusion.

• “Forcing or expecting disabled people to be grateful for an accessible ramp or restroom undermines their daily experience of inaccessibility and discrimination.” Kelly Mack about forced gratitude.

• LNER gets new trains. Not step-free. No level boarding. And they still call it “state-of-the-art”. If we had 1970, that would have been correct.

Something to read

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has published its new strategic plan for 2025 to 2028. They have a focus on transport accessibility.

Something to watch

I love watching videos about accessibility in other parts of the world. So here is Shanghai.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

In August 2019, I travelled from the East Midlands to London St Pancras after a business meeting. I started at around 3pm and expected to arrive at St Pancras by 5.30pm. Spoiler: I never made it to St Pancras. However, my overall trip ended at 1:30am and by taxi, because my train got stranded at Cricklewood station. Cricklewood was not a regular stop for my train; it’s a small station in north London. We were lucky to get stranded at a station where people could easily leave, not in the middle of nowhere.

There was a power cut across the south of England, and the electric Thameslink train in front of us couldn’t move. Our diesel-powered train couldn’t move because the track was blocked by the Thameslink train.

About two hours later, our train was evacuated. Everyone left the train - except the train crew and me. Cricklewood has no lifts. The team lead explained to me that Cricklewood station wasn’t accessible and that the toilet next to me on the train was broken on top. They wanted to move me to another part of the train with a working accessible toilet. Nobody knew what was going on. They had no contact with their control room.

I agreed to move, so they put out a ramp at the door for me to get onto the platform, as my wheelchair wouldn’t fit in the aisle to move through the train. I noticed the steep staircase at Cricklewood station. They then put another ramp down for me to get into First class, where the whole team had gathered and where the working toilet was.

The team wanted me with them so they could help me easily. They were incredibly kind and empathetic, making this the best customer experience I’ve ever had when travelling by train. One team member couldn’t pick up her child from nursery due to the delay, but still, everyone remained positive. Teams are only as good as they are in crisis, and they were brilliant.

They offered me drinks and food from the train for free and even asked if they should go to McDonald’s or the supermarket nearby if I wanted anything else. So kind!

They offered to call the fire brigade or ambulance to get me out, but I didn’t want to call emergency services because it would add to the chaos in England. I was in no emergency. I was fine with food, drinks, and a working toilet thanks to the team.

Despite waiting for hours, they kept checking on me. After about five hours, they discussed how to move our train onto the other platform. The other platform for the other track had step-free access, and there were points between our train and the stranded Thameslink train. They basically had to change the points and drive onto the opposite track. And they did it! They just did it; someone made a bold decision and solved the problem. And after hours and hours before midnight, I could leave the train and the station.

6 months later, I started working for the railway industry. I got a memo on my desk saying that Cricklewood station would receive Access for All funding from the Department for Transport. I laughed out loud when I saw it, but it’s great, good news. Nobody else will get stranded in Cricklewood again due to the lack of lifts, I thought.

Fast forward 6 years, new government, new rail minister. I read the Department for Transport’s press release. The funding for Cricklewood is “indefinitely deferred”. Reason: “As the benefits such upgrades would deliver to users of the station would not justify the significant disruption caused to other users of the Midland Main Line and the significant costs to passengers and taxpayers.” Is this the inclusive culture of the new “Great British Railway”?

It gets so normalised currently, to tell disabled people they are 2nd class customers, electorate, taxpayers and citizens. No social model of disability anywhere. That’s not good if your aim is growth and innovation.

And Cricklewood is not the only station that lost its funding. Of 50 planned stations, only 23 will progress.

Looking back, my long evening, my Cricklewood saga has become more than just a travel mishap; it’s a small case study in what our railways and politics get right and wrong.

On that powerless August evening, a train crew with no information, no working phones and no accessible station still managed to create dignity, safety and a sense of calm. They improvised, they cared, and they took a bold decision so that I could finally get home. That’s what inclusion looks like in practice: people refusing to treat you as a problem to be managed.

Years later, reading that Cricklewood’s long-promised accessibility upgrades have been “indefinitely deferred”, the contrast couldn’t be sharper. On the ground, staff are bending over backwards to make an inaccessible system work for everyone. At the top, the system is still comfortable describing disabled passengers as a cost, an inconvenience, a disruption not worth taking.

If the real reason is (that’s just my guess) that the new Brent Cross West station down the line now offers step-free access, then say that honestly and respectfully. Explain the logic. Acknowledge the people who will still find Cricklewood unusable, and set out how you’ll serve them instead. And then deliver.

Accessibility decisions are complex; ableist messaging is not inevitable. It’s a choice.

Because this is the bigger point: the way we talk about accessibility tells disabled people where they stand in the hierarchy of value. When a government document implies that some citizens just aren’t worth the “significant costs”, it feeds a culture in which disabled people are routinely treated as second-class customers, voters and neighbours. That’s not just morally indefensible; it’s strategically foolish in an ageing society that claims to want growth, innovation and higher passenger numbers. And it signals to the ones who still see accessibility as an annoying add-on, ”don’t change. We don’t like it too.”

My Cricklewood saga showed me what’s possible when people act with empathy inside a flawed system. The challenge now is to build a railway, politics and policy that matches that standard by design, not by exception. Accessibility shouldn’t depend on which crew happens to be on shift when the power goes out. It should be built into every station, every plan and every press release, from the first draft to the final decision.

Christiane Link

Some interesting links

• Bus Users UK has commended the announcement from the Government that £3 billion is being made available to boost bus services across the UK.

• ‘I’m not equal’: The ‘demeaning’ access issues faced by disabled passengers - Very good ITV report and article.

• Liverpool Street Station has some interesting new signage. The lift is very often broken, and replacement is overdue.

Something to read

The National Skills Academy for Rail (NSAR) has published its Rail Workforce Survey 2025, which is an annual comprehensive survey of rail industry professionals. Each year, railway organisations across the industry contribute by submitting their workforce data on demographics, job roles and work locations.

For the second time, they collected data on disability in the railway industry workforce. The sample size was limited, with data received on 29.4% of the workforce. Of these people, 4.5% were disabled. Government data from 2022/23 suggested that 24% of the UK’s population is disabled.

4% is so low that I don’t buy the NSAR’s explanation, “One likely explanation is that employees self-report to their employers whether they are disabled, and either would not consider themselves as disabled or even perhaps aren’t aware of being classified in such a way.” If you don’t know who your disabled people are and if they are scared to come forward, there is a major underlying issue to start with. And where are the people who can’t hide that they are disabled? Where are they?

Something to watch

Did you know that Greece has the most lifts per head in Europe? And that the US and Canada have a lift problem? Really good short film about the lift industry worldwide.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

2026 marks a pivotal year for transport and aviation accessibility, with UK rail reforms expected to accelerate accessibility and level boarding initiatives. With foundational work underway under the Railways Bill, alongside emerging new aviation frameworks and EU laws that drive broader compliance, we could move in the right direction. It’s a fork in the road, and we will see whether this is all window dressing and nothing changes, or whether there is genuine progress toward a more accessible future.

Level Boarding and Rolling Stock Orders

In 12 months, we will know if all railway initiatives and warm words were just that, warm words, or if we see real progress in law, in procurement and in practice.

• Will level boarding be established appropriately in law?

• Will Southeastern finally order new trains, and will they provide step-free access? Will any other train operator order low-floor trains, or are there still inaccessible trains on the order form?

The points above are clear indicators for everyone to assess whether the government, the DfT, and the railway industry are delivering on accessibility.

Accessibility in UK Railway Law

The Railways Bill, currently in the parliamentary process, will make “provision about railways and railway services, and for connected purposes”. That’s the official purpose of the law.

If accessibility is not properly manifested in the law now, it won’t happen for a long time. I think I made it pretty clear in the past years how that should look: Ringfenced money for accessibility and a long-term plan by when which station will be accessible.

Don’t buy any high-floor trains anymore. I’m not the biggest Deutsche Bahn fan (and that’s an understatement), but if even Deutsche Bahn can buy low-floor trains for high-speed routes, the UK has to catch up. Every high-floor train procured in 2026 is would be a waste of taxpayers’ money, and the generations after us will think we were Neanderthals with too much money to spend.

Accessibility of coaches

In the UK, buses and coaches with 22 or more seats used for rail replacement services and school transport must be accessible unless they have an exemption. The applicable law is the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 (PSVAR) (yes, year 2000, and not a new law).

Despite the law and ample time to adjust, the coach industry still has inaccessible buses. The exemptions granted by the Department for Transport will expire on 31 July 2026. From 1 August 2026, operators will be expected to comply with PSVAR in full. So, will that barrier for rail replacement and school transport be finally removed by July, or will there be a new “exemption”?

CAA Accessibility Frameworks

While rail will dominate 2026 headlines, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is on route to advance its accessibility frameworks, still building on EU law to mandate clearer airport and hopefully airline obligations for disabled passengers.

No specific 2026 CAA deadlines have emerged yet. Still, the existing airport framework is expected to be updated, and airlines will also receive their own framework by the end of the year. That’s my optimistic prognosis at least.

Aircraft Cabins with Wheelchair Access

Progress on wheelchair-accessible aircraft cabins remains a dream. Airlines face pressure to install onboard wheelchair spaces. I’m not very optimistic that much will happen in 2026. I hope I’m proven wrong, but I don’t expect any cabin to become operational. If one system gets a regulator approval, that would be something.

EU Accessibility Law and Impact

The European Accessibility Act (EAA), effective from June 2025, profoundly influences the future for the disability community in Europe. I’m very curious to see the law’s impact, not just in the EU but also in the UK. French supermarkets are among the first test cases for the law’s effectiveness. I hope that if companies have to make a product accessible under EU law, they won’t make it inaccessible for the UK market. So if the law is effective (which I have some doubts about), it will have an impact in the UK too in 2026. I’m thinking of brands’ websites, for example.

These are the topics I keep an eye on this year. I wish you all a great 2026. Please look after yourself and cheer for accessibility!

Christiane Link

Some interesting links

• One of the best articles I've read about accessibility and aviation for a long time. I hate the debate about abuse of assistance. The reasons are well explained in the article. It’s really time for airports to appreciate their disabled and older customers. They won’t get replaced by others.

• 1/3 of Transport for London lifts can automatically report their status.

• Disney has a similar issue as some airports. They underestimated the number of disabled people and judged badly who is “disabled enough”. Now they face legal issues.

Something to read

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published its response to The Transport Committee’s Railway Bill inquiry.

Something to watch

Did you know that BT’s best-selling phone was the one with big buttons?

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

You can listen to the newsletter here:

Dear readers,

As this is my last message for 2025, I want to thank you for being here, reading my newsletters, supporting my work and wish you joy, rest, and connection - however you spend the end of the year. Whether you’re celebrating Christmas, Hanukkah, Yule, other traditions, or simply taking some time off, I hope it’s meaningful and peaceful for you.

We now have over 700 subscribers, and my original goal was just 100 readers. I’m d grateful that so many of you are here.

Looking ahead to 2026, I hope accessibility gets the attention it deserves from government, companies and organisations. With the right priorities and mindset, we can make real progress towards equality for disabled people.

Wishing you a joyful end to the year. The next newsletter will be with you on the 6th January.

Yours, Christiane

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

You can listen to the newsletter here:

Across the transport and aviation industries, training is often seen as the cornerstone of culture change. When it comes to disability, however, not all training is created equal. Many organisations still rely on disability awareness courses that, while well-intentioned, often fail to create the lasting shift in attitudes. The distinction between disability awareness and disability equality training is far more than semantics - it determines whether inclusion becomes embedded in the fabric of a company or remains little more than a box-ticking exercise.

Disability awareness training typically focuses on understanding disability from a medical or charitable perspective. These sessions may help participants gain empathy for disabled people’s experiences or learn basic etiquette, yet they rarely challenge the underlying assumptions and power dynamics that cause exclusion in the first place. The tone is often sympathetic rather than empowering, presenting disabled people as passive recipients of care rather than equal participants and experts in their own lives. While this approach can generate goodwill, it seldom leads to meaningful organisational change.

Disability equality training starts from a fundamentally different premise. Rooted in the social model of disability, it frames barriers as the result of exclusionary design, policy, and practice not individual impairment. Equality training is participatory and led by disabled trainers who bring professional expertise and lived experience to the discussion. The focus is not on “raising awareness” of difference but on equipping staff to recognise discrimination, consider equality law obligations, and redesign services to ensure fair access. For transport and aviation operators, this distinction is crucial changes needed. It moves the question from “How do we accommodate disabled passengers?” to “How do we build systems and environments that do not exclude anyone in the first place?”

In industries where safety, efficiency, and customer satisfaction are paramount, disability equality training offers practical advantages. It helps staff and decision-makers understand how inclusive design improves service for all passengers from kerb to cabin. Whether it is booking or boarding procedures, signage, communication systems, or staff interactions, equality-based learning encourages proactive thinking and accountability at every level. It also aligns directly with legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and the Public Sector Equality Duty, ensuring that inclusion is not just aspirational but enforceable.

Moreover, equality training creates cultural competence rather than occasional kindness. Teams that receive it learn how to identify barriers and advocate for solutions that enhance operational performance. A well-designed equality training programme turns compliance into leadership: it equips an organisation to innovate, authentically engage diverse passengers, and demonstrate genuine corporate responsibility.

Transport and aviation are industries built on connection. To achieve true inclusion, companies must move beyond awareness toward equality. Awareness may start the conversation, but equality opens doors and keeps them open. The most forward-looking operators recognise that inclusive journeys start with an equal footing at every stage, from staff mindset to infrastructure design.

For accessibility managers looking to implement disability equality training effectively, the starting point should be meaningful collaboration with disabled facilitators. Their lived experience provides authenticity, authority, and direct understanding of real-world barriers faced by passengers and employees alike. Disabled trainers can challenge assumptions in a way that theoretical instruction never could, grounding learning in the realities of service design and customer experience. Involving them also reflects a core principle of equality: that disabled people must lead and shape the solutions that affect their own lives.

When organisations commission training delivered and co-designed by disabled professionals, they not only build competence but also credibility. This approach ensures that inclusion stops being an abstract goal and becomes an everyday practice that drives excellence, safety, and trust. For transport and aviation industries defined by movement and access, there is no stronger foundation for progress than that.

Some interesting links

• Despite Regulation 1107/2006, which aims to improve access to air travel, disabled passengers still face significant barriers and discrimination. The European Disability Forum’s (EDF) 9th Human Rights Report on air travel explores the practical barriers disabled passengers face when travelling by plane and examines the impact of applicable EU legislation.

• The US government sues Uber for disability discrimination.

• Good comment on the Motability farce: “The whole point of Motability is to make society more inclusive – not to dictate where that inclusion begins and ends. If only Reeves had the slightest idea of what it might be like to have your independence decided for you by out of touch politicians who need a leg up in the polls.”

Something to watch

Apple did it again and did an amazing ad on accessibility - this time with students. For Audio Descriptions, click on the Settings gear icon and select the descriptive audio track.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

You can listen to the newsletter here:

Well, well, well. The Government has finally responded to its railway consultation, and buried within 102 pages of bureaucratic prose lies the future of accessibility on Britain’s railways. I spent considerable time reading this document and watching the Transport Select Committee session with the Transport Secretary; I can report that it’s a mixed bag of genuine progress, political window dressing, and the occasional “we’ll figure that out later.”

A little bit of good news

Let’s start with the positive points:

Board-Level Representation That Matters: Great British Railways (GBR) will have a dedicated board member responsible for accessibility. Not tucked away in a sub-committee or mentioned in passing during quarterly reviews, but sitting at the top table where the big decisions get made. From my experience working with large organisations and government bodies, this move is key if this person takes their role seriously. They won’t have an easy job at the board, and it needs someone with a spine, not a talent for beating around the bush.

Legal Teeth with Bite: The passenger and accessibility duty isn’t just being slapped onto GBR like a diversity sticker in an email signature. It’s going into primary legislation, applying to everyone from the Transport Secretary down to the regulator ORR. When everyone has the same legal obligation, it’s harder for anyone to play the “not my issue” game.

A Watchdog with Actual Powers: The new Passenger Watchdog isn’t just getting a shiny new name. It’s getting powers. I hope it will use them wisely. They can demand data, expose patterns of failure, and drag operators kicking and screaming toward better standards. Again, it will depend heavily on how this new role is filled. With spine and ambition would be a good start.

The “Hmm, we’ll see” category

Now for the bits that sound promising but come with more caveats:

Rolling Stock Consistency: GBR promises more consistent accessibility specifications for new trains. This sounds wonderful until you remember that “new trains” in Britain operate on looooong timescales. And Level Boarding is still not mandatory. The Government has the power to require only standard-height trains for future procurement to enable level boarding. So far, they haven’t, but there is hope.

Integrated Digital Experience: A single, accessible website and app sounds brilliant - until you’ve seen how spectacularly some organisations can mess this up, and the railway industry has a big history book of delayed and botched IT projects around accessibility. I’m actually quite happy with LNER’s app and booking system, and that I can arrange assistance via WhatsApp with Southeastern. I want to book a ticket and get assistance in one go, and I want to be able to talk to the operator on the go because problems never occur when I’m at home using a website. I don’t want to be forced to download a special app. I want train operators to integrate everything into their app, no special passenger assist app. If we get there, it would be a win.

Better Journey Coordination: The promise of seamless end-to-end assistance coordination is music to the ears of disabled passengers. But coordination requires competent people, proper training, and systems that actually talk to each other. The legislation can mandate it, but implementation is key. And no app will fix failed assists. Enough staff and good leadership will.

The political spin

And then we have the sections that read like a political PR agency wrote them:

“Relentless Focus on Passenger Experience”: This phrase appears so often that it must be filled with meaning now. It sounds impressive in press releases, but tells us absolutely nothing about what will actually change.

“More Joined-Up Approach”: Another favourite. It means “we’ll try harder” without specifying what “harder” actually means or how success will be measured.

Consultation, Consultation: I’m getting bored with consultations and questionnaires. Nothing is clearer than what disabled passengers want: Travelling as conveniently (or inconveniently) as everyone else. There were so many studies about accessible travel, barriers to public transport and exclusion in the past; the problem is clear. Now fix it!

Not every paper is a roadmap

Here’s what’s notably absent from all these legislative activities: specific targets, mid- to long-term timelines, and ring-fenced, increased funding to drive meaningful improvements in accessibility.

Rail freight gets growth targets. The environment gets net-zero commitments. Accessibility gets... warm words and a promise that it’ll be considered alongside everything else. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander wasn’t very ambitious either when talking at the Transport Select Committee about accessibility two weeks ago.

The Access for All programme is mentioned, but there’s no commitment to accelerate it or expand its scope. In fact, the Transport Secretary spoke about value for money, inexpensive projects, and not making all platforms accessible. That smells too much of a 90s accessibility approach - before the DDA and that’s not good enough for 2025.

It’s still totally unclear by when all stations in the country will be accessible. When I spoke at the Transport Select Committee in 2023, I said that we need a roadmap to make the railway accessible. We need a timeline for every station by when it will be accessible, even if it takes 50 years. Without a plan, it will never happen. And while you’re on it, refurbish the platforms too to prepare them for level boarding.

Now the Government has presented an “accessibility roadmap” alongside its consultation response. But not every paper is a roadmap, especially not one with such weak delivery points. A so-called “Welcome Point” (a glorified intercom connected to a call centre) won’t get me on a train. Staff does.

To ask the RDG and Network Rail to deliver training standards on customer experience for disabled customers, let me gasp. Network Rail has by far the “most challenged” staff when it comes to assistance at stations, to say it mildly. I don’t tell any secrets here. Euston? St Pancras? Liverpool Street? Not exactly the Singapore Airlines of customer experience for passengers who need assistance. Meanwhile, Manchester Piccadilly prepares for the next beach holidays while customers have failed assists. They would benefit greatly from better standards themselves; I would not ask them to develop them.

The rest of the “roadmap” is not exciting either. Read it; it’s not long. I don’t see much difference from the previous Government. What’s missing is passion. Politicians and governments can deliver on topics they are passionate about - timely and with funding. And accessibility is a topic that needs passion. It’s a matter of political priorities.

Once-in-a-lifetime chance

GBR is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to reform the railway industry. But it needs forward-looking people in charge, not the same old, same old approach, but call it “roadmap”

So far, this isn’t the revolutionary transformation some hoped for in accessibility. The organisational changes make sense, and there’s real potential for improvement. However, success will depend on 1. implementation details that haven’t been finalised yet, 2. funding decisions that haven’t been made, and 3. cultural changes that can’t be legislated and last but not least, timelines for delivery. Every passenger should at least know by when their local station will be accessible.

In other words, it’s a start. But as anyone who’s ever used assistance in the railway system knows, starting well and arriving are two very different things.

Some interesting links

• The UK Government has introduced an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, giving it the power to mandate key accessibility measures at public electric vehicle charging points to ensure accessibility for disabled drivers.

• Here are the next 17 London tube stations set to get step-free access.

• It’s so important that organisations first meet expectations, then embed these expectations in their brand initiatives. Not the other way around. Yes, representation is important, but it must match the reality - Avanti accused of ‘virtue signalling without virtue’

Something to read

The disability community is mourning Alice Wong, who died at the age of 51. Alice was a disabled Asian American activist who shaped the contemporary disability culture. I recommend not only reading Peter Torres Fremlin's obituary. I also recommend reading Alice Wong’s books.

Some final words

In her farewell message that she left, Alice said:

“It was thanks to friendships and some great teachers who believed in me that I was able to fight my way out of miserable situations into a place where I finally felt comfortable in my skin. We need more stories about us and our culture. You all, we all, deserve the everything and more in such a hostile, ableist environment. Our wisdom is incisive and unflinching. I’m honored to be your ancestor and believe disabled oracles like us will light the way to the future. Don’t let the bastards grind you down. I love you all.”

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

You can listen to the newsletter here:

When I look back 30 years, there are certainly some milestones in the UK, Germany and Austria where I would say that was the turning point in disability rights. In December 2025, Deutsche Bahn will roll out a new era of German high-speed travel with the launch of the ICE  L - a train that promises not only comfort and style, but something far more profound: accessibility. I would expect that this train could become such a turning point as well.

For the first time, passengers can roll, walk, or wheel straight from the platform into a high-speed Intercity Express without steps, ramps, or awkward hydraulic lifts. In a country where 76 cm platforms are the norm, this is a milestone decades in the making.

A new kind of ICE

Built by Spanish manufacturer Talgo, the “L” stands for “low floor” or “level boarding” for railway enthusiasts. The entire train sits level with standard German and Dutch platforms, creating a truly seamless boarding experience. Its continuous low-floor design runs the full length of the carriage, meaning no interior steps either - just an even surface from vestibule to bistro car. This makes boarding faster for every passenger: wheelchair users, parents with prams, holidaymakers with bikes, and anyone hauling luggage through Berlin Hauptbahnhof on a tight connection.

But the innovations don’t stop at the doors. The ICE L features signal‑friendly windows (finally solving the dead‑zone problem), adaptive lighting that adjusts with the time of day, and thouroughly tested ergonomic seating. No irononing board issue between Cologne and Berlin. Deutsche Bahn even enlisted over 1,600 volunteers to trial seating comfort and interior usability before final sign‑off.

Though capped at 230 km/h - slower than other ICE generations - the ICE L focuses on comfort, sustainability, and accessibility rather than raw speed. Each set includes three wheelchair spaces, height‑adjustable tables, family areas, and a bistro car. It’s not a race car; it’s a rolling living room. Also the table on the wheelchair space is quite clever. It’s liftable and isn’t in the way when manouvering into the space. Show me your wheelchair space and I show you how overdue new rolling stock is.

What it means for disabled travellers

For disabled passengers, the ICE L could remove one of the biggest barriers to independent long‑distance rail travel in Germany. Until now, wheelchair users had to request assistance, rely on lifts or bridge ramps, and hope platform staff were available. With this train, independence finally becomes the default even on long-distance trains. “We want to inspire people with our trains. With the new ICE L, we are clearly focusing on more comfort and reliability for our passengers. Every new train contributes to stable operations. That’s why we have consistently modernised our fleet in recent years and acquired many new high-speed trains,” said Deutsche Bahn CEO, Evelyn Palla.

The German environmental transport association VCD called it “a genuine step toward accessibility” - “With the ICE L, Deutsche Bahn is taking a step in the right direction. At long-distance platforms, which in Germany are typically 76 cm high, passengers can board at ground level, even with rollators or wheelchairs. The train uses tactile guidance systems and Braille. The train will have three spaces for wheelchairs. The VCD demands four, but this is still progress.

The VCD said, Deutsche Bahn intends to deploy the train primarily at platforms with 76 cm height. “This shows that the path to complete accessibility on the railway is not yet finished. The VCD will advocate for further steps to follow.” Still, with Berlin–Cologne services starting 14th December  and extensions planned to Sylt, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and Vienna by 2026, the blueprint is clear: accessibility at scale.

Lessons for the UK

Across the Channel, the ICE L raises uncomfortable but important questions. Britain’s railways remain a patchwork of legacy platform heights, manual ramps, and “assisted travel” systems that still require advance notice in many circumstances. The German approach suggests a pivot: design the train to meet the infrastructure, not the other way around which will never happen in our lifetime.

Talgo’s use of shorter, articulated coaches and single‑axle bogies keeps weight low enough for a continuous low‑floor design - a concept that UK rolling stock manufacturers could adapt for future fleets. Greater Anglia, Merseysiderail and Transport for Wales are already leading the way with Stadler. And I cringe every single time some railway dinosaur is celebrating “new” rolling stock already not fit for purpose anymore because of steps.

Everyone speaks about value for money for the taxpayer, but suddenly that’s not the focus anymore when it comes to accessibility of rolling stock. Then we still do the same old, same old, if Stadler doesn’t come to the rescue accidentially. So I’m waiting for the new Southeastern rolling stock at my doorstep. It better provides level boarding and they better start ordering. It doesn’t get cheaper anyway.

There was not much I could praise Deutsche Bahn for in the past 40 years, I avoid them because their assistance is often abysmal and non-existent. So, the story of the ICE  L isn’t just about engineering; it’s about inclusion, technology, and quiet transformation. It’s the result of acknowledging that accessibility is not a bolt‑on feature which you can fix later, but a design philosophy. As the first passengers glide smoothly from platform into their seats this December, Germany will have taken a small but historic step - by eliminating one altogether.

Some interesting links

• The US Transportation Department will not enforce a rule issued in December by former President Joe Biden’s administration that requires new consumer protections for disabled passengers using wheelchairs. That’s really bad news for everyone who travels to or in the US and has a wheelchair or any other mobility aid. The rule would have also required airlines to reimburse passengers for damage to their wheelchairs.

• The Severn Valley Railway (SVR), a heritage railway between Shropshire and Worcestershire, England, approximately 18 miles south-west of Birmingham, has launched a historic coach that can welcome wheelchair users. The trust hopes this accessible buffet car and saloon will be an inspiration to other coach restorers across the heritage sector.

• My hairdresser is next to an Overground station. I know these made-up rules on the Overground just too well. There is always something wrong in the Matrix when wheelchair users want to board, and we are going backwards if that’s not stopped and immediately prevented from happening. The Overground has more than enough space to welcome everyone.

Something to watch

So far, lifts were a pretty accessible endeavour for quite a wide group of people, including deaf-blind people, if the lift had Braille and tactile buttons. Still, the world can over-engineer everything, and that’s a problem because it leads to exclusion.

@askablindpersonWhy smart elevators are a problem for blind and deafblind people. #blind #deafblind #blindtok #disabilityawareness #disability #accessibility #learnontiktok

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

If you have issues watching this because you have no TikTok account, watch here.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a free 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

You can listen to the newsletter here:

The last newsletter, “10 Life Lessons on Accessibility,” sparked numerous conversations and initiated many new subscribers. Welcome, everyone, and thank you to everyone who responded to the text or forwarded it!

So I thought I would explain a bit more and answer some questions and responses.

The “ Accessibility benefits everyone” debate: When Nuance Gets Lost

Several readers challenged my criticism of the “accessibility benefits everyone” argument, pointing out that digital accessibility genuinely does improve usability for all users - better structure, colour choices, navigation. They’re not wrong about the outcomes, but outside digital accessibility, it’s not always the case, and even with digital accessibility, there are features that benefit mainly disabled people, such as videos with sign language.

Yes, curb cuts help people with pushchairs. Yes, captions help people in noisy environments. Yes, clear signage helps everyone navigate more easily. But here’s the thing: when we lead with “benefits everyone,” we’re essentially saying that disabled people’s needs only matter if they coincidentally help non-disabled people too.

It’s the difference between designing for everyone and designing for disabled people with incidental benefits for others. One approach centres on disability rights; the other makes them conditional on broader utility.

One reader suggested this framing might be “a lever of persuasion for change, as people are often closest to themselves.” They’re right that it can be strategically useful. But a strategy that undermines the fundamental argument - that disabled people deserve access as a matter of human rights. The moment we need to justify disabled people’s inclusion by pointing to benefits for others, we’ve already lost the rights-based argument.

We don’t do this with other groups of people. We don’t try to argue that playgrounds are for grown-ups or that urinals are benefiting women somehow. We recognise that various groups have distinct needs and try to meet them.

Breaking Out of Echo Chambers

“That’s often more difficult than one thinks,” wrote one reader about “Nothing About Us, Without Us.” They pointed out that “accessibility needs a lobby” to find space in public consciousness.

This highlights a crucial distinction: the difference between having a lobby and having genuine representation. Lobbies speak for groups; authentic representation means those groups speak for themselves and use their unique lived experience of disability to improve the status quo.

Yes, it’s challenging to ensure genuine inclusion. Still, the solution isn’t to create more intermediary voices - it’s to actively seek out and platform the voices that already exist but aren’t being heard in mainstream spaces. That also means building relationships with the disability community and not just going for tokenism when it’s needed.

Social media is a great starting point for that. For many disabled people, these online spaces are an easy-to-access community, a place to share experiences and organise. The problem isn’t that we’re in bubbles - it’s that non-disabled people aren’t making the effort to step outside their own. To determine how well an airport, station, or transport company delivers accessibility and inclusion, check X and other relevant platforms. For example, Euston Station in London has such a bad reputation that it even has its own hashtag, #EustonWeHaveAProblem, on social media about failed assists.

And when it comes to accessibility advisory groups, a proper application process is key. Do you want people who nod along or people your organisation can actually benefit from? While lived experience is important and key, competence and understanding of the environment in which an organisation operates are also important, just to mention one point. And I can’t emphasise enough how important a progressive understanding of disability and the social model is. Someone with a medical model mindset will not further an organisation’s development on inclusion.

Examining Motivations: The PLOD Question

Several readers spent considerable time reflecting on my point about PLODs (People Living Off Disabled people). This self-reflection is exactly what I want to see more of.

Here’s how I distinguish between genuine allies and PLODs:

Genuine allies amplify disabled voices, share power and resources, listen more than they speak, and continue the work even when no one’s watching. They are purpose- not PR-driven.

PLODs centre themselves in the narrative, speak over disabled people, collect awards and recognition for “helping,” and disappear when the work gets difficult or unglamorous. And virtually all of them follow the medical model of disability because the social model doesn’t work with the PLOD narrative.

The fact that readers are questioning their own motivations suggests they’re in the first category. PLODs rarely engage in this level of self-examination.

The Language Dilemma: When Avoidance Causes Harm

Several readers admitted struggling with certain terminology, with one writing: “I find it difficult to use certain terms, not because they apply but because I feel like I’m already verbally separating by focusing on one of many aspects.”

This is where good intentions can cause real harm. When non-disabled people avoid saying “disabled,” they’re not protecting us from stigma - they’re reinforcing it. The message becomes: “This word is so terrible that I can’t even say it.”

The problem isn’t the word “disabled” - it’s the shame and stigma society has attached to it. By avoiding the term, we perpetuate that shame instead of challenging it.

My disability isn’t one aspect among many that I’d prefer you ignore. It’s a fundamental part of my identity and experience. When you avoid naming it, you’re asking me to make myself smaller for your comfort.

From Reactive to Proactive

Readers raised an excellent point: “Wouldn’t the goal be precisely that the focus on accessibility transitions into societal normality? So that one considers needs proactively rather than reactively?”

Absolutely. The ultimate goal is a world where accessibility is so embedded in how we design, build, and think that it becomes invisible - not because disabled people don’t exist, but because their needs are automatically considered from the start.

But here’s the tension: we can’t leap from our current reality of widespread exclusion to that future vision without acknowledging where we are now. We’re still fighting for basic access, basic recognition, basic rights. We can’t skip the “accessibility is a process” stage and jump straight to “accessibility is normal.”

The path to proactive inclusion runs through reactive accommodation. We need both the immediate fixes and the long-term cultural shift.

The Value of Uncomfortable Conversations

What struck me most about these responses wasn’t the specific points raised, but the approach to the conversation. Readers didn’t dismiss ideas that made them uncomfortable or try to explain away their privilege. They sat with the discomfort and used it as a starting point for learning.

This is what real dialogue looks like. Not the performative debates. It was a genuine engagement with ideas that challenge our existing frameworks.

Some interesting links

• The Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge has published a new report, BSL is not for Sale: a Deaf-led approach to AI procurement. Minderoo is an independent research team at Cambridge that studies how technologies reshape power, society, and the planet. The report sets out practical principles considering AI systems that generate or interpret British Sign Language.

• Train stations in the North are set to be made more accessible after wheelchair user Doug Paulley, who was left stranded while travelling, took on a legal battle.

• Ramps which allow step-free access for aircraft travelling to Guernsey are being introduced at Southampton and London Gatwick airports.

Something to watch

Disabled and elderly people are faced with stairs if they want to use Peckham Rye Station. Plans to install lifts were shelved this year by Network Rail due to a lack of funding. Peckham Rye is the busiest interchange station in the country without step-free access.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a free 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

This newsletter is a week late for the simple reason that I was unwell and my body thought it was a great idea to spend some time in A&E. Twice. I’m much better now (thanks, NHS!) I had some time to reflect on my work and life while resting. So here are some lessons and thoughts I had last week that I wanted to share:

1. “Accessibility benefits everyone, not just disabled people”, is a flawed argument

Yes, “Accessibility benefits everyone” sounds great, but it is not the best argument if we really appreciate disabled people. And it isn’t always true either. An induction loop benefits people with hearing aids, a Changing Place benefits those who need a hoist and a bench for their toilet needs and a wheelchair space on a train benefits wheelchair users. These are all important features I wouldn’t want to miss, even though they only benefit a certain group of people - disabled people.

The designer Cathy Malcolm Edwards wrote on LinkedIn recently, “When we frame accessibility as something that only gains value if it serves everyone, we risk sidelining the core truth: accessibility is about equity, rights, and dignity. It’s about removing barriers so people can participate fully, whether or not others happen to find those features convenient.” I couldn’t agree more and won’t use this argument anymore.

2. Disability is part of human diversity

Disability isn't something to "overcome" or "fix" - it's a natural part of human variation. Embracing this perspective shifts focus from changing people to changing environments and systems. Social Model of Disability for the win! I strongly believe that if accessibility work and initiatives are not based on the social model, they cause more harm than good.

3. Nothing About Us, Without Us

The most important voices in accessibility conversations are those with lived experience of disability. I find it very confusing how some people separate the topics of accessibility and disability completely from each other. They have non-disabled teams, they don’t get disabled people involved and think they do something good. It doesn’t work like that. Talk to the people who are affected by the decisions and don’t just pick the convenient voices.

4. The people who shout the loudest about what they do for disabled people are very likely PLODS

People who make the loudest noise about their support of disabled people are often what I call PLODs - People Living Off Disabled people. This can be individuals or organisations. They are eager to highlight every action, grant, or project that looks like it supports accessibility or disabled people, but frequently, their actions aren’t aligned with genuine inclusion. Instead, PLODs thrive on attention, awards, and funding, rather than listening to disabled people, sharing power or considering long-lasting impact and meaningful change.

True progress is rarely found in headline-grabbing gestures, but in consistent advocacy that centres disabled voices and sustainable outcomes. They hardly ever base their work on the social model of disability, but on charity, because that doesn’t require listening to disabled people and self-reflection.

5. Small decisions can have a massive impact - positive and negative

I really wish more people knew that small decisions can affect people’s lives and are often a matter of better inclusion or no inclusion. Not fixing a toilet seat but leaving it till after the weekend means that wheelchair users visiting over the weekend will have serious issues using the toilet at all. Placing the emergency alarm cord at a high level will impact everyone who has a fall and can’t get up from the floor. This is strongly linked to the lack of knowledge about what certain features are for and why they are important. But doing something that looks very minor can often have a big positive impact.

6. Accessibility is a process, not a destination

There's no "perfectly accessible" endpoint. It's an ongoing duty to learn, improve, and adapt as we gain a deeper understanding of diverse needs. It’s also not a pick-and-choose. Just because a place has a ramp doesn’t mean the work is done. “What can we do next?” should always be the question at the end of a successful project.

7. Language shapes reality, and reality is mirrored in language

I don’t correct how people speak normally, but language is a clear indicator of inclusion and understanding for me, especially if people do accessibility for a living or are constantly in touch with the topic. Avoiding the term “disabled” is a big red flag. Telling me I have “special needs” is like telling me I’m asking for too much and I don’t belong. My needs are not special. I just want to participate and therefore need adjustments or inclusive design. There’s nothing special about this. Not everyone has the same needs, and that’s okay.

8. Accessibility looks different for everyone

True accessibility isn't about making everyone do things the same way; it's about providing multiple pathways to achieve the same goals and outcomes. Give people options. E.g. sending everyone to a help point - no matter if they can reach it or not, if they can use an intercom or not, if they can find it or not, is not an accessibility concept. It’s just box ticking.

9. Assumptions are the enemy of inclusion

The most embarrassing situations I've had in life were those when people assumed what I want, what I do, and what I can’t be and when I assumed things about others. When I worked as a journalist, I was told at the press desk that the PR material “is only for journalists” assuming I can’t be one; when I worked in railway I was told I must be in the wrong meeting room because the meeting was “only for senior managers” and on business trips the flight attendants asked me countless of times how my holiday was and if I had a nice time even when most of the trips where certainly not holiday destinations. And I’m not immune to assumptions myself. When I worked at the BBC, I assumed that my blind colleague must be working for radio, not TV. Assumptions are a huge barrier to accessibility because they often reflect limited imagination about what’s possible and what is needed to achieve inclusion.

10. Accessibility is a human right, not a favour

Access to information, the built environment and opportunities isn't something to be grateful for. It's a fundamental right. Framing accessibility as charity undermines these rights.

Some interesting links

• They are not the first in the UK; that was LNER, but still good news: Passengers who prefer to pre-book assistance when travelling by train can now request assistance at the same time as booking rail tickets on ⁦the Greater Anglia website. Disabled people also have only 24 hours in a day and shouldn’t need to do so many repetitive tasks before being able to travel - search the train, book the ticket, then search the train again and book assistance is just a ridiculous customer experience. Now roll it out nationally and integrate it into the train operators’ app, and let me book the wheelchair space like any other seat without much singing and dancing.

• Did you know that there is a global deaf restaurant map where you can find restaurants with deaf owners and/or staff?

• Are blind people better at perceiving auditory motion? And if so, why? A study examined these questions to understand how people perceive motion (e.g., traffic) and how this perception changes when people are blind.

Something to watch

ABC in Australia explains the social model of disability in a short film called “Rethinking Disability”. I wish they had adjusted their language to the social model as well (people with disabilities vs disabled people), but that’s me being heavily influenced by British English, of course.

Some final words

A friend sent me this cartoon after we discussed the new inaccessible footbridges that Network Rail plans to install in Kent and other places.

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a free 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

If you haven’t yet made time in your schedule for a trip to the Victoria & Albert Museum in London, the Design and Disability exhibition is an essential pilgrimage for anyone responsible for or interested in accessibility. This is not an exhibition about objects alone; it's a vibrant, activist tapestry of lived experiences, creative ideas, and a challenge to all to reimagine the approach to accessibility. It runs until 15 February 2026.

Visibility, Tools, and Living

With over 170 objects spanning fashion, technology, urban design, architecture, and protest art, the exhibition is split into three sections: Visibility, Tools, and Living. Each illuminates how Disabled, Deaf, and neurodivergent people have not just adapted to barriers, but have remade the world around them. My favourite object was a t-shirt with the slogan “Access is Love”.

What the show does best is treat disability not as an afterthought or minor category of design, but as a driving force for innovation. Disabled designers are presented as the experts in their own lives and as the rightful drivers of change.

Bold and unapologetic

Objects are bold and unapologetic - from protest posters and fashion that radically reclaims identity to visual media showing Disabled people as creators, not just subjects. The message is clear: Inclusive design starts by centring Disabled voices.

Adaptive Xbox controllers sit beside hacked wheelchairs, showing how mainstream products can be transformed when Disabled expertise is embedded from the beginning.

The political power of design comes alive: objects and campaigns here highlight not just what Disabled people have built, but how they’ve fought for recognition, rights, and inclusive futures. Whether through grassroots activism for accessible infrastructure or creative protests against exclusion, the exhibition shows that the accessibility we have today didn’t happen by chance but through activism by Disabled people.

The V&A’s approach to inclusivity of the exhibition itself was impressive too: tactile surfaces, sensory maps, BSL guides, rest stops, and seating throughout the exhibition.

The exhibition “Design and Disability” is both a celebration of decades of Disabled activism and a blueprint for genuinely inclusive futures. As the world faces policy setbacks and austerity, this exhibition shows that progress in access is always hard-won. I got a strong reminder of that when I wanted to travel home from the exhibition. Due to the inaccessibility of South Kensington station and the simultaneous breakdown or maintenance of lifts at Green Park, Victoria, St Pancras Thameslink platform, and London Bridge Southeastern platform, I had no choice but to take a taxi to get home.

Some interesting links

• The tourist hotspot, South Kensington tube station in London, could become accessible. Maybe.

• In 1853, Elisha Otis sold his first lift following his invention of the elevator safety brake. In 1900, the Grand Palais in Paris was built and it was just upgraded from 2 to 49 lifts. A good reminder of what’s possible, even in historic buildings.

• A landmark rule to expand the rights of disabled air travellers in the US has been hamstrung by a lawsuit from major airlines and delayed enforcement by the Transportation Department.

Something to read

The international Paws For Access Report on Assistance Dog Rights has exposed the widespread exclusion and humiliation faced by guide and assistance dog owners across the globe.

Some final words

[Introduction of the exhibition “Design and Disability” at the Victoria & Albert Museum: Design plays a huge part in how people experience the world. But our environments have been designed in ways that privilege certain people over others. And, historically, disability has been seen as a problem for design to 'solve' rather than its own valid culture and identity.

Disabled people past and present have challenged and confronted the imbalance of design in society. By exploring approaches to design developed within Disabled, Deaf and Neurodivergent communities, and listening to the lived experiences of disabled users, we can understand how innovative design can address structural inequalities and create opportunities.]

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication.

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a free 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.

One of the biggest myths in accessibility is the notion that newly built projects are automatically accessible. Well, Network Rail seems to be on a mission to prove this myth wrong over and over again.

A “groundbreaking” new footbridge is set to span the railway line between Kennington’s Crown Hill View and Conningbrook Lakes in Ashford. With groundbreaking, I mean new barriers from the ground.

Labelled by Network Rail as a safer, sleeker, cost-effective alternative to the current dangerous level crossing, the project’s fundamental flaw has gone overlooked: it will be inaccessible to many disabled people and countless others who rely on step-free access when moving from one side of the tracks to another. That sounds like Groundhog Day?

It is. Network Rail had to cancel plans for a similar footbridge in Copmanthorpe after disabled people took legal action.

Safety… At What Cost?

While nobody debates the necessity of improving safety - a level crossing surrounded by expanding housing poses clear risks - the decision to replace one barrier with another is indefensible in 2025. Network Rail’s revised design abandons the more costly ramped option, settling instead for a stepped-only solution. Their stated reason: budget constraints and “responsibility to spend taxpayer money appropriately.”

Interestingly, I just completed my tax return yesterday, and I find comments like this quite offensive. Last time I checked, disabled people, families and older people who struggle with steps are taxpayers too, and I would like to see my taxpayers’ money spent in an inclusive way, not in a way that funds access for young people without buggies who can walk.

The group they are excluding with these projects gets bigger and bigger. And it is even more concerning because this bridge links housing projects. Are the new housing plans only for non-disabled people? The footbridge will offer a narrow wheeling ramp only for bikes, not for wheelchair or mobility scooter users, nor for parents with buggies, nor for older people with limited mobility.

This is not an isolated incident: Network Rail has a recent track record of building footbridges across the UK that exclude disabled people entirely and even calls these new bridges “innovative”. It is an appalling contradiction of promises on accessibility and equity.

Legal and Social Failure

Network Rail’s reliance on cost savings all the time, as well as the claim that future upgrades might someday provide lifts, simply bakes in inaccessibility for decades. It tells disabled people they're an afterthought, only to be accommodated if funds miraculously appear or pressure mounts.

It’s also a dishonest claim. It means they don’t have enough money to build the bridge. If you can’t deliver accessibility, you can’t deliver a decent project from the start. That’s not groundbreaking or innovative; that’s appalling. It’s poor planning. It is, in fact, a waste of taxpayers’ money. Nothing gets saved by delivering bad-quality projects.

It means that entire communities - including older residents, disabled people and families - face detours or even full exclusion from public spaces and active travel routes intended to improve connectivity and well-being.

The Real Cost of Exclusion

Flimsy justifications about cost savings mask the reality: inaccessible infrastructure costs cities, towns and their residents in the long run. Research consistently shows that truly accessible infrastructure delivers significant health, environmental, and mobility benefits, reducing congestion and boosting local economies for all.

And what happens next?

Well, let me look into my crystal ball. There will be legal action again. Imagine how much money Network Rail could save by not constantly planning against disabled people and fighting legal cases, but instead using the money to provide access. That’s what I would appreciate. As a taxpayer.

Some interesting links

• The UK Government has been urged to support an amendment to ensure that public EV charging infrastructure is accessible for disabled drivers.

• “True customer experience excellence doesn’t mean saying yes to every request. It means designing a system that supports consistency, clarity, and care for both the customer and the team.”

• The Rail Accident Investigation Branch has launched an investigation into a near miss involving a manual boarding ramp at Norwood Junction station on the Windrush line.

Something to read

I recently joined the launch of the Greater London Authority report “Designing with Disabled Experience” - a new report exploring how inclusive, creative, and equitable design can be embedded across London.

Grounded in lived experience, the report calls for a shift from minimum standards to meaningful, justice-led design practices.

Some final words

The Accessible Link is a reader-supported publication. So, if you like what you’re reading, consider to…

Become a paid subscriber

Who is writing this newsletter?

I’m Christiane Link, and I improve the customer experience in aviation, transport, and travel. I worked as a journalist for over two decades and travelled extensively for business and leisure. I’m a wheelchair user.

Work with me

Whether you're a Customer Service Director, a Head of Customer Experience, a corporate Accessibility Manager, a DEI leader, a transport planner, or a member of a disabled employee resource group, I can help you make your organisation more inclusive. You can book me for speaking engagements or hire me as a consultant for your accessibility or DEI strategy, communications advice and other related matters. I have worked for airlines, airports, train operators, public transport providers, and companies in other sectors.

Book a free 1:1 meeting

If you want to read more from me, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter, Bluesky or Mastodon. You can also reply to this email if you want to contact me.

.