Switzerland - RhB refuses assistance at Alp Grüm

[kingqueen]

In Switzerland, under their Disability Discrimination Law (BeHiG) the SBB has committed to making all stations "barrier free" (step free access to the platforms and level boarding onto trains.
Despite admirable resource expenditure, it hasn't reached that yet. So they made a commitment.

We are therefore offering temporary alternative solutions at all stations that are not autonomously barrier-free from the beginning of 2024.

And

the law also allows alternative measures such as assistance from staff at train stations where the benefit of an adaptation is offset by disproportionately high costs. SBB is temporarily offering such assistance at all train stations that will not be autonomously barrier-free from the beginning of 2024.

(Machine translation of a SBB blog post I'm now struggling to find, but the commitment is public and clear.)
But this doesn't seem to apply to other operators - even though assistance is still coordinated (and perhaps provided?) by SBB.
For instance, RhB. A station I would like to use next month: Alp Grüm, remote station, has step free access to platforms but no level access to the train - and RhB / SBB refuse to provide a ramp or lift onto/off the train.
(I guess an equivalent station in the UK would be Corrour, no road access but sorta level access platform and the guard puts down a ramp no problem. In the UK, train operators are obliged to provide assistance at all their stations, even if it is a taxi from an inaccessible one.)
What I'm wondering is, why it is OK for the RhB to not provide assistance at some otherwise accessible stations, whereas the SBB think it is mandatory under the BeHiG.
A bit esoteric, Swiss rail accessibility law, I know, but thought I'd just ask

 

[35B]

In Switzerland, under their Disability Discrimination Law (BeHiG) the SBB has committed to making all stations "barrier free" (step free access to the platforms and level boarding onto trains.
Despite admirable resource expenditure, it hasn't reached that yet. So they made a commitment.

And

(Machine translation of a SBB blog post I'm now struggling to find, but the commitment is public and clear.)
But this doesn't seem to apply to other operators - even though assistance is still coordinated (and perhaps provided?) by SBB.
For instance, RhB. Two stations I would like to use next month: Alp Grüm, remote station, has step free access to platforms but no level access to the train - and RhB / SBB refuse to provide a ramp or lift onto/off the train.
(I guess an equivalent station in the UK would be Corrour, no road access but sorta level access platform and the guard puts down a ramp no problem. In the UK, train operators are obliged to provide assistance at all their stations, even if it is a taxi from an inaccessible one.)
What I'm wondering is, why it is OK for the RhB to not provide assistance at some otherwise accessible stations, whereas the SBB think it is mandatory under the BeHiG.
A bit esoteric, Swiss rail accessibility law, I know, but thought I'd just ask

Whatever the law says, it's hardly surprising that two completely separate companies take different views on how to fulfil their obligations. And as Alp Grüm is over 100km by rail from the nearest SBB station (Chur), I wouldn't be expecting SBB to provide the assistance.

 

[kingqueen]

Should RhB provide the assistance?
Here in the UK, even for such remote stations the train operating company is required to provide assistance - generally by the guard deploying a ramp stored on the train.

 

[35B]

Should RhB provide the assistance?
Here in the UK, even for such remote stations the train operating company is required to provide assistance - generally by the guard deploying a ramp stored on the train.

Do you mean morally, or legally? Morally, I agree with you - in the same way that I regard the guard doing that at Corrour as a good thing. Legally, the RhB is governed by the laws of the Canton(s) and the country as a whole - and especially the BeHiG. And that takes us back to the blog post you're relying on - it's marketing material by SBB, and completely detached from what the RhB might do.

 

[kingqueen]

Legally, the RhB is governed by the laws of the Canton(s) and the country as a whole - and especially the BeHiG.

Thank you re the moral obligation.

I'm wondering if the BeHiG or anything else says anything specific about what the company has to do.

Like the 2020 Rolling stock accessibility deadline in the UK, or the ORR licensing obligation to provide assistance at all UK stations.

Presumably not, and thus it is down to interpretation of the BeHiG equivalent of what is a "reasonable adjustment"...

 

[bahnause]

Alp Grüm is not accessible, not even within the station. Neither the restaurant nor the hotel are accessible. This is also shown on the official Map. The Disability Discrimination Act also provides for exceptions, where its implementation would be impossible or disproportionate. In the high alpine region, Alp Grüm is just one of many cases. Implementation is monitored by the legislator and does not differ between the individual TOCs.

 

[kingqueen]

Thank you for this.
The restaurant could readily be made accessible by means of portable ramps. As could the train, and as it would be in the UK, even at the most remote stations.
(Actually I reckon I could manage the restaurant steps in my wheelchair.)
The map says that no access is possible, as I point out in my original post. But access could be provided by portable ramps carried on train and deployed by guards, like they are in the UK. I would love to have access to the platforms, like at remote stations in the UK.
SBB say that they provide assistance at literally all their stations that don't have level access.
Indeed I can't see any SBB stations on that map that don't have some form of access, even if by shuttle bus or alternative public transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To what extent have you used the narrow gauge lines? They often have very low/narrow platforms, sometimes even none at all. They're more like sort of tramway things in places.

I can see why some of them might indeed not be accessible (just as some UK stations aren't due to e.g. access to the platforms only being stepped or the drop from train to platform being too great for a ramp, though stations in the latter position increasingly have Harrington humps to avoid that), but not even attempting it at all at any location might be a bit off.

 

[bahnause]

Thank you for this.

The map says that no access is possible, as I point out in my original post. But access could be provided by portable ramps carried on train and deployed by guards, like they are in the UK. I would love to have access to the platforms, like at remote stations in the UK.
SBB say that they provide assistance at literally all their stations that don't have level access.

Good luck with the ramp. The platforms are way too narrow to use any kind of lift or ramp even in good conditions. The platforms and the railheads are more or less at the same height and the doors are very narrow, the carriage floor pretty high. The widest doors with „low floor“ entrance are to be found in the „Allegra“ EMU, and they often stop at the far end in in a curve without any platform. Direct access to the trackbed. Access to platform 2 might be interesting too, no way to deploy a ramp there. And a lot of the trains are DOO.

 

[Fragezeichnen]

There are also no public roads leading to Alp Grüm, only a mountain track so a taxi would probably also not be a viable solution.

Given that low/narrow platforms are not rare on the RhB network I wonder a bit why a lift wasn't included in the Allegra design. Perhaps it would take up an unreasonable amount of space in a 3 car unit. Some German ICEs have one but they have 8 carriages.

 

[bahnause]

Given that low/narrow platforms are not rare on the RhB network I wonder a bit why a lift wasn't included in the Allegra design. Perhaps it would take up an unreasonable amount of space in a 3 car unit. Some German ICEs have one but they have 8 carriages.

The law requires the ability to use the public transport independently, with the emphasis on ‘independently’. A lift cannot fulfil this requirement and staff is generally not available on trains. Even the lifts in the ICE can only bridge the height difference between the vehicle and the platform and not down to the top of the railhead. In addition, the platforms at the stations concerned here are too narrow anyway to allow a lift with the necessary space to manoeuvre a wheelchair safely.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The law requires the ability to use the public transport independently, with the emphasis on ‘independently’. A lift cannot fulfil this requirement and staff is generally not available on trains. Even the lifts in the ICE can only bridge the height difference between the vehicle and the platform and not down to the top of the railhead. In addition, the platforms at the stations concerned here are too narrow anyway to allow a lift with the necessary space to manoeuvre a wheelchair safely.

That's a very odd way of looking at it. Surely something is better than nothing? Are you genuinely saying that Swiss law says that if you can't provide to the full extent of the requirements you must provide nothing at all? How bizarre.

 

[bahnause]

That's a very odd way of looking at it. Surely something is better than nothing? Are you genuinely saying that Swiss law says that if you can't provide to the full extent of the requirements you must provide nothing at all? How bizarre.

The law was drawn up in cooperation with the disability associations and approved by them. Where implementation is not possible, alternative measures must be offered or exemptions applied for in special cases. With this system, the vast majority of wheelchair users (and other users) will benefit from barrier-free, flexible public transport without registration deadlines and dependence on staff.

 

[35B]

That's a very odd way of looking at it. Surely something is better than nothing? Are you genuinely saying that Swiss law says that if you can't provide to the full extent of the requirements you must provide nothing at all? How bizarre.

Given the specific location, the exemption doesn't seem entirely unreasonable. And if we compare with the situation here in the UK, it's rather refreshing to see things set up with the focus on independent travel, not reliance on staff assistance that may or may not be readily available.

 

[bahnause]

Given the specific location, the exemption doesn't seem entirely unreasonable. And if we compare with the situation here in the UK, it's rather refreshing to see things set up with the focus on independent travel, not reliance on staff assistance that may or may not be readily available.

The law regulates much more than just the physical accessibility of stations and trains. Information systems must also be designed accordingly. This includes, for example, the SBB Inclusive App, which provides support with information in the station and on the train (and offers a search function for door buttons, among other things).

 

[Trainbike46]

Good luck with the ramp. The platforms are way too narrow to use any kind of lift or ramp even in good conditions. The platforms and the railheads are more or less at the same height and the doors are very narrow, the carriage floor pretty high. The widest doors with „low floor“ entrance are to be found in the „Allegra“ EMU, and they often stop at the far end in in a curve without any platform. Direct access to the trackbed. Access to platform 2 might be interesting too, no way to deploy a ramp there. And a lot of the trains are DOO.

View attachment 172836View attachment 172837

Ramp designs that can bridge such a distance do exist - they are used in Belgium and the Netherlands at times. However, they would have to be stored at the station, and can't be stored on the train.

In short, there is no technological reason why they couldn't provide a ramp similar to the ones below. Bigger issues might be how to get from the platform to the actual destination. Unfortunately, that something is technologically possible doesn't mean it will be provided.

Some examples:

Eurostar Wheelchair Boarding Ramp - Wheelchair Travel

wheelchairtravel.org

 

[bahnause]

Ramp designs that can bridge such a distance do exist - they are used in Belgium and the Netherlands at times. However, they would have to be stored at the station, and can't be stored on the train.

In short, there is no technological reason why they couldn't provide a ramp similar to the ones below. Bigger issues might be how to get from the platform to the actual destination. Unfortunately, that something is technologically possible doesn't mean it will be provided.

We have been using ramps like these for 20 years. However, the comparison of your pictures with Alp Grüm should make it abundantly clear that the infrastructure there does not consist of a wide, level-access, covered platform. There is no chance of being able to move such a thing at all in wintery conditions. When comparing the pictures, I would be less concerned about the lack of accessibility of a little-frequented remote station in the middle of nowhere, than about the fact that such assistance is necessary for a high-speed train that was only introduced a few years ago.