Mobility Accessibility Research Study

Executive Summary

Background and Objectives

The CRTC decided to conduct qualitative research to understand why there is a large disconnect between accessibility needs regarding wireless mobility products and services and information provided by large wireless service providers (WSPs)

Study Method

This research study focussed on mobile phone products and services offered by Rogers, Bell, Telus and Videotron. It did not evaluate their flanker brands (e.g. Fido, Koodo, Virgin, etc.) or any other WSPs. Therefore, this report represents a limited view of the potential issues and barriers faced by seniors and those with disabilities. All phases of this study were conducted in English.

The three phases of research included: a website review, a digitial advertising review, and mystery shopper phone calls.

Website Analysis

The accessibility products and services provided by the WSPs were analyzed through the information provided on their websites. Rogers, Telus, Bell and Videotron all have an accessibility webpage and offer products and services for those with accessibility needs. All four providers also mention the CRTC Wireless Code of Conduct and include a video of the CRTC Wireless Code in Sign Language, which is available in American Sign Language (ASL) and Langue des signes québécoise (LSQ).

Though all four WSPs have an accessibility webpage, locating it can be difficult.

• To successfully link to the accessibility webpage, the customer would need to instinctively scroll to the very bottom of the homepage to find the only direct link.
• Customers are unable to locate the accessibility webpages by clicking on ‘Support’ from the homepage.
• If a customer uses the search bar to try to locate the accessibility webpage (by searching the word ‘accessibility’), they are forced to filter through many search results.
  • Searching the word ‘disability’ does not return successful first page results on Telus’ or Bell’s websites.
  • Searching the word ‘senior’ does not return any successful results on any of the WSPs’ websites.

Services

• On their websites, all four providers note that they offer alternative billing services and can provide monthly mobile phone bills in Braille, large font and an electronic version. Bell also offers CD versions of bills.
• Bell, Rogers and Telus indicate on their websites that they allow customers to bring a sign language interpreter to in-store visits. The sign language interpreter can invoice their time to Bell, Rogers, and Telus for providing the interpretation services. This allows the customer to use the sign language service free of charge. Videotron does not list this service on their website.
• On their websites, all four providers list additional mobile phone services that are available for those with accessibility needs such as T911. Bell and Telus also offer Interactive Voice Response (IVR) operator assistance and directory assistance.
• Of the four WSPs, Videotron is the only provider to advertise on their website an exclusive mobile phone plan for those with accessibility needs, while Bell is the only provider to offer complimentary data for those who qualify.
• Of the four WSPs, Rogers and Telus are the only providers that indicate on their website that they offer qualifying customers who have a disability a $20 discount off mobile phone plans.

Device Features

On the websites, all four WSPs offer some information about:

• Device features that can be modified to fit accessibility needs
• External device connectivity (e.g. Braille display that connects to the phone, or specialized keyboard or mouse for those with physical disabilities, etc.)
• Accessibility software that can be installed after purchasing the device.

However, the predominant features displayed and explained vary across the four WSP websites.

• Some websites provide lists of features (Videotron, Rogers) while others provide an icon with a brief description of the feature below (Bell, Telus).

Key Differences Among the Four WSPs

• Rogers is the only provider that does not offer information on cognitive accessibility needs.
• Bell is the only provider that offers customers the ability to filter for the accessible features they are looking for in a device and compare multiple devices. This provides the customer the ability to make a more informed decision on their mobile phone purchase.
• Rogers’ and Videotron’s webpages are difficult to navigate when considering the needs of those with visual or cognitive disabilities. The device features sections on Rogers’ website are particularly sparse. The device features section on Videotron’s website is confusing because the features listed are the same for each disability. For example, hearing aid compatibility is listed in the ‘Impaired Vision’ section.

Key Gaps

• The accessibility webpage is not easy to find on each provider’s website.
• Many services are offered specifically for those with accessibility needs. However, these services are not always explained in detail.
• Some accessibility services that the providers offer are free, while others cost an additional charge. Some of these services need to be registered for and are only compatible with certain devices. With the multifaceted aspects of these services, it can be confusing to understand what is offered free of charge, how to register for these services, and which devices are compatible with the services.
• The accessibility webpages showcase mobile phone features that can be adjusted, downloaded, or are compatible with specific accessibility services. However, customers are only able to easily compare these accessibility features between devices on Bell’s website.

The following tables summarizes the findings of the website review. For all tables in this report a indicates that the WSP has that feature on their website.

Table 1

Digital Advertising Analysis

Advertising focusing on seniors and those with disabilities is incredibly limited.

Some advertising was inclusive, in that it featured seniors and/or those with disabilities. However, only one ad we found (from Bell) highlighted any specific mobile phones or mobile phone plans aimed at these target groups.

Mystery Shopper Phone Calls

For the purposes of this study, we placed one phone call to each provider for each disability. For WSPs with special accessibility lines, we placed two calls for each disability: one to their general line and one to their accessibility line.

Telus

The quality of the service provided by the Telus customer service agents was quite varied. For the most part, they were friendly, did not seem rushed, and did not engage in any hard/pushy selling. However, their level of knowledge about accessibility needs was inconsistent, and in many instances, it was very lacking.

• The agents’ level of device knowledge was inconsistent. When we probed about which devices would give the best experience for someone with a given disability, some agents demonstrated reasonable knowledge of the device options and were able to give good recommendations. Other agents seemed unfamiliar with both the accessibility features available on popular devices, as well as the specialized devices made for seniors and those with disabilities. This lack of knowledge meant that the agents had to frequently put us on hold in order to answer our questions.
• The more knowledgeable agents brought up features of the phones that they thought we would be interested in, even though they did not necessarily directly address the disability that we were calling about (e.g. a feature that might generally be useful for the elderly but does not directly address a cognitive disability).
• The agents were able to offer a variety of phone plans, including monthly and pay-as-you-go plans. However, none of the plans were unique to those with disabilities or seniors.
• The agents provided inconsistent answers when we asked if they had an accessibility department. On one call, we were told that Telus had a Service 2.0 department to help current customers who have a disability, while on other calls we were told that there was no accessibility department.

Overall the agents noted very few special offerings or services for customers who have a disability.

Rogers

In addition to their general phone line, Rogers advertised in the accessibility section of their website that they have an Accessibility Service Centre, with a group dedicated to customers’ accessibility needs. However, based on our limited set of phone calls to this accessibility line, our impression was that we were not reaching a department dedicated to accessibility needs.

• When we called the accessibility line, we were directed to a call centre in Montreal, where the majority of the service agents did not seem knowledgeable about accessibility needs. While they were friendly and professional, on most calls, they tried to transfer us to other departments or put us on hold as soon as we asked an accessibility question.
• In another instance, where we pushed to determine if there was an accessibility department, the agent did not appear to know that they had answered the accessibility line, or that they were supposed to deal with clients with accessibility needs. Instead, the agent said that they were with the Loyalty Department. The agent seemed uninformed and told us they were not dedicated solely to clients with accessibility needs.
• In one last instance, however, when we called about vision disabilities, we reached an agent who insisted that they were part of the accessibility department, which they claimed was staffed by 10 people. This agent was friendly and seemed to have some knowledge about accessibility products and services, but their knowledge was inconsistent.

Compared to their accessibility line, our overall experience with Rogers’ general phone line was somewhat better, with fewer transfers and attempts to put us on hold. However, the level of accessibility knowledge was also quite varied on the general line.

Across both phone lines, the service agents were generally unable to speak to what special services they offered to customers who have a disability beyond the relay service they provide for those who are deaf or hard of hearing, and the $20 discount offered on some phone plans, if the customer meets the eligibility requirements.

Bell

Bell has two phone lines that can be called to gather information: a general line and an accessibility line.

The service provided by Bell’s general phone line is, for the most part, unsatisfactory.

• The agents did not seem engaged and often seemed rushed. They did not appear motivated to find a solution for our needs.
• The agents seemed uninformed as to what features might be helpful for specific disabilities. For example, when we called about physical/mobility disabilities, they did not ask us whether the customer was able to text.
• When we told the agent on the general customer service line that we were calling about accessibility offerings, we expected them to transfer us to the accessibility department or advise us to call the accessibility department ourselves. However, in all but one instance, they did not mention the accessibility department. In fact, they seemed unaware that it existed.

The service on the accessibility line was much better than on the general line. In fact, it was the best service provided across all four WSPs’ phone lines. When we inquired about the department with one of the agents, they mentioned that they took pride in having a small department of 4 people, because they insisted that they want to understand customers and their needs in a more personal way. They also want customers to be able to request a specific agent by name once they have built a relationship.

• The agents were able to speak about Bell’s phone and plan offerings in a way that showed they were knowledgeable about the specific needs of customers with disabilities.
• The agents generally went the extra mile to help the customer. For example, they immediately offered to email the forms needed to prove you have a disability and to sign up for their special services. Additionally, they looked up the nearest Bell store to our address, so that we could go in person to try out their phone recommendations.

The accessibility department was able to tell us about many special offerings for clients with accessibility needs (which the general line did not mention).

Videotron

Overall, Videotron provided polite and friendly service that made the customer feel as though the agents wanted to help and provide a solution that would be satisfactory.

• However, this service was slow, as the agents consistently had to put us on hold to look up information. They were very knowledgeable about their phones and plans, but their knowledge was general, as opposed to being specific to any disability. For the most part, they were unable to speak knowledgeably about specific phone features or services that might be helpful to those with disabilities. They often insisted that the customer visit a Videotron store to try different phones and learn about their features. If pushed for more information over the phone, they needed to put us on hold and look up the necessary information to answer our questions.
• In many instances, the customer service agents recommended an Alcatel flip phone. Our impression was that this phone was the “go-to” recommendation for any disability, whether or not it was the best option.
  • When we called about mobility needs, they were unable to recommend a specific phone.

When we asked about any special offers or services for those with disabilities, we were told that they offered a discount, but they did not provide specifics. When we called about mobility/dexterity disabilities we were told that they have a disability plan, but it was not available for mobility/dexterity disabilities, just for vision and hearing disabilities. This plan was not offered when we called about cognitive, vision, or hearing disabilities.

In some instances, the agents mentioned their 711 relay service, access to 411, and in one instance they told us that in store we can book a free 45-minute appointment with a specialist who would show us how to use our new phone.

Conclusions

Overall, there is significant room for improvement among the WSPs regarding accessibility information, products, and services. While some providers excel in some areas (e.g. Bell’s accessibility line), there is opportunity for improvement on all the providers’ websites, in their advertising, and on their customer service phone lines. Detailed recommendations that address these opportunities for improvement can be found on page 36 of this report.

Background and Objectives

In June 2015, the Canadian Radio-television & Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) staff convened a Technical Roundtable event regarding the accessibility of mobile wireless handsets. This roundtable indicated that there was a lack of awareness, by Canadians with disabilities, of the accessibility-related services and products offered by service providers, and that this lack of information disempowers those individuals. The CRTC considers this to represent a ‘knowledge gap’ that would also apply to seniors.

The CRTC decided to conduct qualitative research to understand why there is a large disconnect between accessibility needs regarding wireless mobility products and services and information provided by large WSPs. This research would help determine where these knowledge gaps are stemming from, and how the WSPs can improve their services and communications to seniors and those with disabilities.

Study Method

Forum Research conducted three phases of research that were all focussed on mobile phone products and services. This research study evaluated Rogers, Bell, Telus and Videotron. It did not evaluate their flanker brands (e.g. Fido, Koodo, Virgin, etc.) or any other WSPs. Therefore, this report represents a limited view of potential issues and barriers faced by seniors and those with disabilities. All phases of this study were conducted in English. The three phases of research included:

1. Website Review Desk Research – which reviewed the websites of Rogers, Bell, Telus, and Videotron to assess their accessibility offerings and the ease of gathering information relevant to mobility customers who are seniors and/or who have a disability.

   [This review was completed February 18th – 21st, 2019 and March 4th -8th, 2019.]

2. Digital Advertising Review Desk Research - which reviewed a variety of online sources (mainly social media) looking for wireless phone/service advertising from Rogers, Bell, Telus, and Videotron aimed at seniors and/or those with disabilities.

   [This review was completed March 7th – 11th, 2019.]

3. Mystery Shopper Phone Calls – which consisted of phone calls made to Rogers, Bell, Telus and Videotron asking about mobility services and phones for those with disabilities. We placed one phone call to each provider for each disability. For WSPs with special accessibility lines (Rogers and Bell), we placed two calls for each disability: one to their general line and one to their accessibility line. All mystery shopper phone calls were conducted from Toronto.

   [These phone calls took place between March 6th - March 21st, 2019.].

Important note about the findings and recommendations: This research study did not include interviewing those with disabilities, or seniors, to better understand their needs and concerns when it comes to gathering information about wireless mobility products/services via the phone and the four WSPs’ websites. Therefore, the findings and recommendations provided in this report are based solely on our own assumptions as to what their needs are, and what challenges they might encounter when learning about the WSPs’ offerings for mobility products and services.

Detailed Findings

Website Analysis

‘Accessing’ Accessibility Information

All four WSPs provide information about their accessibility products and services on their respective websites. They all have a similar homepage layout that provides a one-click direct link to the accessibility section of their website.

Locating The Accessibility Webpage

From the Homepage

When on the homepage of each WSP website, customers are able to explore a variety of products, services and support information regarding mobility, Internet, television and home phones. However, when exploring all four WSP websites, we were unable to access the full accessibility page without clicking on the accessibility link at the bottom of the homepages. To access this link the customer would need to know to scroll to the very bottom of the homepage and click on a link that could say ‘Accessibility’, ‘Accessibility Centre’, or ‘Accessibility Services’. In fact, if customers are unable to locate the small accessibility link at the bottom of the homepages, it is nearly impossible for them to easily find any accessibility information.

• The ability to visually locate the accessibility link is also hindered by the small font. For customers who have a variety of visual or cognitive disabilities, the visual design and location of the direct link to the accessibility webpage is likely difficult to locate and read.
• However, Bell’s ‘Mobility’ webpage offers a small amount of information that showcases how to set up their Mobile Accessibility App. It took a minimum of three clicks through the website to access this information. Nonetheless, this does not lead to Bell’s full accessibility webpage.

Scrolling through the websites

The webpages of all four WSPs have been designed with a bar at the top that usually contains a link to ‘Shop’ for products, access ‘Support’ (for a variety of issues such as billing), and a link to the customer’s account portal.

When trying to find the accessibility information, it is our perception that the logical step would be to click on the ‘Support’ button. However, the accessibility webpage is not located within any of the providers’ ‘Support’ webpages, nor is there any information featured that directs the customer to accessibility information.

If the customer clicks on the ‘Mobility’ section within the ‘Support’ webpage, there is little to no information about accessibility for mobile phones or services.

• Of the four, Bell is the only WSP that provides some information about accessibility within the ‘Mobility’ support section of their website. However, in that section Bell does not provide a link to their full accessibility webpage.

Search Bar

For all four WSPs, if the customer uses the search bar located on the upper right-hand side of the homepage, there are a variety of possible searches they could conduct to try to find the relevant accessibility information.

• If the customer searches ‘accessibility’, they would encounter difficulties accessing the appropriate webpage. The search provides a wide variety of results that customers are required to filter through.
  • Of the four WSPs, Bell’s search is the only one that does not show the appropriate accessibility page within the first page of the results.
• If the customer searches ‘disability’, they will find a direct link to the accessibility webpages on the Rogers and Videotron websites. On the Telus and Bell websites, this search is unsuccessful.
• If the customer searches ‘senior’, none of the WSPs’ websites result in any accessibility information.

CRTC Wireless Code of Conduct

On all four WSP websites, there is information about the CRTC’s Wireless Code of Conduct and individual rights as a wireless customer. They also all feature a video that is available in American Sign Language (ASL) and Langue des signes québécoise (LSQ) that explains customer rights.

• Overall, of the four WSPs, Telus provides the most detailed information about the Wireless Code on their website.
• Telus also provides several videos in ASL (that can be accessed through the wireless accessibility webpage) that explain common wireless terminology.
• The four WSPs provide a link from their website to the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-television Services (CCTS). CCTS is an independent resource for customers if they are unable to reach a satisfactory resolution with their service provider.
  • Information regarding the CCTS can be found easily within the Bell and Telus websites.
  • This link is harder to find on the Rogers and Videotron websites. To find this information, customers would need to do a more thorough search through the websites or know the correct key words to enter into the search bar.

Accessible Products

All four providers showcase their accessibility categories (e.g. hearing/speech, vision, physical/mobility, cognitive) in a similar manner.

• Their websites list 3 to 5 accessibility areas: Hearing, Speech, Vision, Physical/Mobility and Cognitive. Hearing and Speech accessibility needs are sometimes combined as one service area. Currently, Rogers is the only provider that does not have a section on their website for cognitive disabilities.

Common Phone Features

On the four WSP websites, a variety of device features are listed specifically for accessibility needs. Many of these features can be changed, or adapted, to help the customer effectively use their device. The features appear to be listed to demonstrate the capabilities of devices that customers might not know about, and to help them pick the best device for their needs.

Vision

Common features that are listed on the websites for visual accessibility are:

• Magnifying screen
• Adjustable font sizes
• Adjustable screen sizes
• Raised keypad markers
• Audible and tactile notifications
• Voice-activated control
• External Braille display
• Speech-to-text functionality
• Built-in screen reader
• Video calling (e.g. Skype or FaceTime)

Hearing and/or Speech

Common features that are listed on the websites for hearing and/or speech accessibility are:

• Audible and tactile notifications
• Messaging (SMS, email, instant messaging)
• Video calling (e.g. Skype or FaceTime)
• Teletypewriter (TTY)
• Hearing aid compatibility
• Alternative and augmentative communication (AAC)

Cognitive

Common features that are listed on the websites for cognitive accessibility are:

• Audible and tactile notifications
• Photo contact list
• Raised keypads
• Voice control

Physical/Mobility

Common features that are listed on the websites for physical/mobility accessibility are:

• Audible and tactile notifications
• External input device
• Auto answer
• Built in screen reader
• Physical keypads

Differences in Phone Features Offered

On the websites, all four WSPs offer some information about:

• Device features that can be modified to fit accessibility needs
• External device connectivity (e.g. Braille display that connects to the phone, or specialized keyboard or mouse for those with physical disabilities, etc.)
• Accessibility software that can be installed after purchasing the device.

However, the predominant features displayed and explained vary across the four WSP websites.

Vision

All four WSPs include information about visual accessibility device features on their websites.

Furthermore, the WSPs all provide a similar number of features on their websites, with Telus displaying the greatest number of features. Despite listing a similar number of features, those that are listed vary across the four WSPs’ websites.

• Some features are automatically included on most smartphones, such as the capabilities to adjust font sizes and screen displays, and to magnify the screen.
• Other features listed involve installing third-party applications or special devices such as accessibility software and an external Braille display.
• Features that depend on the phone manufacturer include voice-activated controls, speech-to-text functionalities, and raised keypad markers.

The following table summarizes the vision disability device features listed on each of the four WSPs’ websites.

Hearing and/or Speech

All four WSPs include some information about hearing accessibility features on their websites. However, the Rogers website provides limited information about two features, while the Telus website provides information on 6 of the 7 hearing and/or speech features.

• The Rogers website provides information about their Message Relay Service (MRS) to assist those who have hearing or speech accessibility needs with making and receiving calls through teletypewriting (TTY) or IP Relay services. However, the rest of the information within this section of their website lists features for television and home phone services.
• The Telus website lists six device features and provides brief information on each.
• The Bell website lists four device features and provides brief information on each.
• The Videotron website lists five device features, but does not provide information about these features.

The following table summarizes the hearing/speech disability device features listed on each of the four WSPs’ websites.

Physical/Mobility

Bell, Telus and Videotron each list six physical/mobility device features on their respective websites.

• In this section of the website, Telus and Videotron note that external devices can be used with phones, but they do not provide any information about what external devices are, how they can be used, where to purchase them, etc.
• Bell’s website notes that they offer an ‘assistive device’ and that they have a “special offer” for customers with physical accessibility needs. When the customer clicks on that link they are taken to the page for Tecla, a device that helps those with physical mobility limitations navigate a smartphone without touching the screen. This webpage provides a variety of information about the device, including an explanation of how the device works (including a video), the key features, and which smartphones it is compatible with. It also highlights a discount for the device for Bell mobility customers.
• Rogers’ website includes one or two features for each type of phone: Apple, Blackberry and Android.
  • Apple: they mention that Siri can help with placing calls, setting reminders, etc.
  • Blackberry: they mention the Impatica viaDock, which allows the user to operate their Blackberry through a computer.
  • Android: they mention that users can get accessories for their phone such as a mouse and keypad that can be used via Bluetooth. They also mention that Android phones allow for voice commands.
  • At the end of this section the Rogers website also mentions that there are many third-party applications and hardware that can assist with accessibility.

The following table summarizes the physical/mobility disability device features listed on each of the four WSPs’ websites.

Cognitive

The cognitive accessibility section of the Bell, Telus and Videotron websites includes features that are suitable for unique learning needs such as reading and writing as well as reminder systems for those experiencing memory loss. However, these three WSPs list slightly different features that would best suit the needs of those with cognitive disabilities.

• Telus displays six features on their website, while Bell and Videotron showcase the greatest number of features (seven) on their websites.
• On their websites, Bell and Telus list the features and provide brief information about each, including how they can be helpful.
• On the Videotron website, the features are listed without any accompanying information.

As was mentioned earlier, Rogers is the only provider that does not have a separate section on their website for cognitive disabilities.

The following table summarizes the cognitive disability device features listed on each of the four WSPs’ websites.

A list of features can provide information to help customers easily identify the capabilities of each specific phone. However, it would be helpful if the customer were able to know how they can adjust certain features to fit their needs. For example, ‘adjusting notifications to reduce visual clutter’ is a very helpful feature, but knowing how to implement this change would provide additional assistance to customers.

Understanding the Device Features

One of the key differences among the four providers’ websites is how the accessibility features (for each phone) are displayed.

• Some websites provide lists of features (Videotron, Rogers), while others provide an icon with a brief description of the feature below (Bell, Telus). On their websites, Bell and Telus provide more information about the specific device features for each disability, but as was mentioned earlier, the features listed are not the same across all the provider websites.
• Rogers provides a very limited list of features that could be beneficial for those with disabilities.
  • In the hearing/speech and physical sections of their accessibility site, they do not list any specific phones and their features to help customers make their choice. However, they list devices that are compatible with T911, but do not provide links to learn more about those devices.
  • In the vision section, the information about device features is confusing because it is listed by operating system (Android, Blackberry, Apple), not by each phone they sell. For example, this implies that every Android phone offers the same features.
  • Additionally, Rogers includes the information about mobility, television and home phone together on the same webpage. Overall, based on our website review, Rogers customers would likely find it challenging to understand the device features that would help them navigate their device.
• Videotron has separate webpages for each accessibility need. However, on each of those webpages, the same list of accessibility features is found. This is problematic because the accessibility needs of those with mobility challenges are vastly different from those with hearing disabilities. Customers would have a difficult time identifying which features are best suited for their unique needs.

Recommended Devices

• On their website, Bell displays three recommended devices for each disability. Bell is the only WSP that allows users to select a device and then lists the exact accessibility features available on that device. If the customer wants more information about a particular device, Bell also provides a link to the manufacturer’s accessibility website.
• As was mentioned earlier, on the Rogers website users can access a list of devices that are compatible with T911.
  • Within the hearing/speech accessibility section of the website, the T911 compatible devices are the only device recommendations offered.
  • Within the vision and physical accessibility sections of the website, Rogers recommends types of phones such as Android, Blackberry or Apple and their respective general features, but does not recommend specific device models.
• On the Telus and Videotron websites, a short list of devices that have some accessibility features is provided. When the customer selects a device, they are taken to the device’s general webpage. These webpages are designed for the mass population and are used as a primary marketing tool to sell the device. For those with accessibility needs, the device’s webpage can be difficult to navigate and the accessibility features (though listed in the ‘specifications’ section) are not prominently displayed.

Alternative Monthly Bill Formats

According to their websites, all four WSPs offer a variety of alternative monthly bill formats free of charge for those who are partially sighted or blind.

• Alternate formats need to be requested by the customer and usually require them to either contact customer service or to fill out a form.
• All WSPs offer monthly phone bills in Braille, large font and/or electronically. Bell also provides monthly bills as an audio CD or electronic text CD.

Accessible Services

Accessible services are needed to provide additional support to seniors and those with disabilities. The websites list some free services that are provided by the WSPS and some that incur additional charges.

Services Provided Free of Charge

According to their websites, additional services the WSPs offer free of charge include:

• Those with hearing disabilities are offered a directory and operator assistance using teletypewriting (TTY).
  • On their websites, Telus, Videotron and Bell also state that operator assistance is available for those who need to navigate through an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system. Customers can also request an agent to place a call to provide direct assistance on behalf of the customer.
    • Rogers does not explicitly state within the Hearing Accessibility section of their website that customers can request an agent to place calls using TTY.
  • Video Relay Service* for those who communicate through ASL and LSQ is mentioned as an offering on all four WSP websites. This service allows customers who use sign language to communicate with voice telephone users. However, on Rogers’ and Videotron’s websites we could not find explicit mention of this service being free of charge.
  • Text 911 services are also listed on the websites of all four WSPs as being available free of charge.
    • However, on their websites all four WSPs state that the user must register for the Text 911 service by calling or filling out an online form.
• According to their websites, another service provided by Telus, Bell and Rogers is the ability for the customer to bring their own sign language interpreter for in-store visits. These three providers state that the service is free, because the telecommunications company pays for the costs of interpretation services.
  • On Bell’s and Telus’ accessibility webpage this information is easily found. Bell’s webpage provides an easy-to-understand form that customers can fill out to receive services from the Canadian Hearing Society. Telus’ website provides a customer service line to call to request this service.
  • On Rogers’ website it is much harder to find this information – it requires more “digging” through their webpages. It is unclear on the Rogers website how the customer can access a sign language interpreter.
  • Videotron does not list this service on their website.

Services that can be provided for free are also found in different areas of the accessibility page, which can make it difficult to understand which free services the customer is offered.

• On the websites, some providers state that users must register for these services, but they do not provide any information on how this is done (such as a link or phone number).

According to all four WSPs’ websites, IP Relay service calls** are available.

• Rogers and Videotron do not explicitly list this service on their websites as being free of charge, while Telus and Bell state that it can be provided for free. The lack of consistency across the providers could cause some confusion.
  • On their website, Rogers does not state anything about the cost of the IP Relay service.
  • On their website, Videotron states that long distance calls will be billed according to the customers’ long distance plan, but they do not state that local calls are free.
  • On their website, Telus clearly states that IP Relay service is free for local calls.
  • On their website, Bell clearly states that IP Relay service for local calls is free of charge. They also state that long distance calls are billed at a reduced rate.

*Video Relay Service (VRS) is a CRTC mandated Internet-based service for Canadians who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing. The service is delivered by the Canadian Administrator of Video Relay Service Inc. and is free of charge for customers who use it. Canada’s telecommunications service providers fund the costs associated with providing this service. The service is available in four languages, ASL/English and LSQ/French. To use the service, customers are required to have a broadband Internet connection. For more information visit https://srvcanadavrs.ca/en/

**In Canada, the CRTC requires that two types of message relay services (MRS) be made available to all Canadians: (1) TTY relay service and (2) IP relay service. The IP Relay service allows customers to place and receive text-based relay calls from their mobile device. The IP Relay agent connects the two parties and types and reads the conversation that is occurring between them. More information about this service can be found on the CRTC’s website https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/phone/acces/mrsrt.htm

Additional Plans and Discounts

• On their websites, Rogers and Telus note that they offer eligible customers with disabilities (e.g. those who are deaf, deaf-blind, hard of hearing and/or if they have a physical accessibility requirement) who do not need a standard phone plan, a $20 discount on their phone bill. Neither company states on their websites whether this is a one-time discount or a discount that is applied monthly to their bill.
• On their website, Videotron notes that they offer a $64.95 per month plan for customers with a visual or hearing disability. This plan includes unlimited calls, unlimited text messaging, call display, voicemail and 8GB of data.
• On their website, Bell notes that they offer 2GB of complimentary data per month for customers with accessibility needs. This is an add-on feature and can only be added to plans that already have a minimum of 1GB of data per month.

Extended Trial and Usage Fee

According to their websites, all four providers offer a 30-day refund for products and plans purchased by those with accessibility needs. However, the providers do not clearly state the standard data usage limit when discussing the return policy. It is usually expected that customers are under a certain data limit before a device, or plan, is refunded. This is not explicitly stated by the providers on their websites.

Exclusive Offerings and Programs

On their websites, Telus and Bell feature some exclusive programs and offerings to help customers who have a disability.

• Telus offers ‘The Assistive Tech for Good ™‘ program, which helps those with disabilities get set up with a mobile phone or tablet to fit their needs. This program is in collaboration with the Neil Squire Society. The program also offers financial support toward the cost of the technology. The program is currently offered to those with limited arm or hand dexterity, and it is available in British Columbia with plans to expand to Alberta.
• Bell offers a developer program to help incentivize the creation of mobile applications for those with accessibility needs. The program provides support, resources and APIs (application programming interface) to developers. This is to encourage the creation and testing of applications that keep in mind customers with disabilities.
• According to the websites, Bell is the only provider to advertise a Mobile Accessibility App.
• According to the websites, Bell is the only provider that offers billing information on CDs.
• According to the websites, Bell is the only provider that offers the Tecla assistive device for customers with mobility disabilities.

Digital Advertising Analysis

A thorough scan of the WSPs’ websites and social media indicates that advertising focusing on seniors and those with disabilities is incredibly limited.

Some advertising is inclusive, in that it features seniors and/or those with disabilities. However, only one ad that we found highlights any specific mobile phones or mobile phone plans aimed at these target groups.

In our research we found an Apple ad that is directly aimed at those with disabilities (e.g. hearing, mobility, vision) – this ad explains very specifically how Apple products can assist those with disabilities. We found nothing of this nature from the WSPs.

Bell

Bell is the only provider that had an ad specifically aimed at those with disabilities, and that highlighted a phone that could assist them. This was a print ad featured on the Canadian Council of the Blind Newsletter (January 2019 and May 2018) that highlighted the Doro phone and noted that that phone is designed with accessibility in mind. However, beyond this ad we were unable to find any additional advertising from Bell aimed at, or featuring, these target groups.

Telus

We were unable to find any Telus ads aimed specifically at our target groups. However, we were able to find several ads that were inclusive, featuring seniors and those with disabilities. Telus appears to make inclusivity a priority in these ads. Nonetheless, these ads represent missed opportunities to provide more information aimed at our target groups, and/or to indicate that accessibility is a priority in their offerings and services.

Rogers

As with the majority of the other providers studied, we found no specific advertising from Rogers aimed at the target groups. Once again, we found missed opportunities to be more inclusive and inform customers that they address accessibility needs.

Videotron

As with the majority of the other providers studied, there were no Videotron ads found which were relevant to the target groups. However, we were somewhat limited in our search due to many of the ads being in French.

*All ads referenced in this section can be accessed through URL links provided in the Appendix of this report.

Mystery Shopper Phone Calls

It is important to note that Rogers and Bell have special phone lines dedicated to accessibility, while Telus and Videotron do not. For the companies with special accessibility lines, we called both their accessibility and general lines, in order to compare the levels of service provided. Unfortunately, not all customers with a disability may be aware of the accessibility lines, so we felt it was important to also call the general lines.

We placed one phone call to each provider for each disability. For WSPs with special accessibility lines, we placed two calls for each disability: one to their general line and one to their accessibility line.

Telus

The quality of the service provided by the Telus customer service agents was quite varied. For the most part, they were friendly, did not seem rushed, and did not engage in any hard/pushy selling. However, their level of knowledge about accessibility needs was inconsistent, and in many instances, it was very lacking.

• On some calls the agents began the conversation with a few questions about the customer’s abilities (e.g. can the individual use text messaging and would they have a need for data), which we thought was helpful.
• The agents’ level of device knowledge was inconsistent. When we probed about which devices would give the best experience for someone with a given disability, some agents demonstrated reasonable knowledge of the device options and were able to give good recommendations. Unfortunately, other agents seemed unfamiliar with both the accessibility features available on popular devices, as well as the specialized devices made for seniors and those with disabilities. This lack of knowledge meant that the agents had to frequently put us on hold in order to answer our questions. In one instance, where we were calling about mobility/dexterity disabilities, the customer service agent was so unknowledgeable that they offered to transfer us to someone else. Unfortunately, the agent they transferred us to was even less knowledgeable than the initial agent.
• The more knowledgeable agents brought up features of the phones that they thought we would be interested in, even though they did not necessarily directly address the disability that we were calling about (e.g. a feature that might generally be useful to a senior, but does not directly address a cognitive disability).
• On most calls the agents consistently recommended the Alcatel flip phone. However, in these cases, they also gave a second phone suggestion, to give the customer a choice.
  • On one call, they asked us to pull up the Telus website and used it to walk us through the features of the Alcatel flip phone. This really helped our discussion, because, before we looked at the website, the agent didn’t seem to know the features of the phone very well.
• The agents were able to offer a variety of phone plans, including monthly and pay-as-you-go plans. However, none of the plans were unique to those with disabilities or seniors.
• The agents provided inconsistent answers when we asked if they had an accessibility department. On one call, we were told that Telus had a Service 2.0 department to help current customers who have a disability, while on other calls, we were told that there was no accessibility department.

Special Offerings

• No unique services were offered for customers who have a disability.
• On one call, the agent offered a $20 discount for those with disabilities, but it was only available on plans that have data included, making it somewhat limiting as some seniors and some customers who have a disability would not have a need for data.
• On one call the agent mentioned an accessibility exemption for 411 services.

Rogers

In addition to their general phone line, Rogers advertised in the accessibility section of their website that they had an Accessibility Service Centre, with a group dedicated to customers’ accessibility needs. The department had its own phone number, which included instructions for how to access it by TTY Message Relay Service.

However, based on our limited set of phone calls to this accessibility line, our impression was that we were not reaching a department dedicated to accessibility needs.

• When we called the accessibility line, we were directed to a call centre in Montreal, where the majority of the service agents did not seem knowledgeable about accessibility needs. While being friendly and professional, on most calls, they tried to transfer us to other departments or put us on hold as soon as we asked an accessibility question. In one instance we were put on hold for over 12 minutes and eventually gave up and had to call back again.
• In another instance, where we pushed to determine if there was an accessibility department, the agent did not appear to know that they had answered the accessibility line, or that they were supposed to deal with clients with accessibility needs. Instead, the agent said that they were with the Loyalty Department. The agent seemed uninformed and told us they were not dedicated solely to clients with accessibility needs.
  • In some cases, the agent put us on hold many times to try to find information to answer our questions. When they returned, they seemed to just be reading from their accessibility website. In other instances, we were left with long pauses, which led us to think the agent was spending their time looking up information to answer our questions.
• In one last instance, however, when we called about vision disabilities, we reached an agent who insisted that they were part of the accessibility department, which they claimed was staffed by 10 people. This agent was friendly and seemed to have some accessibility knowledge, but their knowledge was inconsistent. They still needed to look up information to answer our questions, and they provided some confusing answers to the questions. They were, however, able to make a specific phone recommendation and mentioned a general $20 discount for provable vision disabilities. We were told we should call a special number to give proof of our disability, in order to get the discount. However, the number provided turned out to be Rogers’ Accessibility Service Centre number, which is the number we dialled to reach this agent. When we told this to the agent, they seemed surprised.

Compared to our experience with their accessibility line, our overall experience with Rogers’ general phone line was somewhat better, with fewer transfers and attempts to put us on hold. However, the level of accessibility knowledge was also quite varied on the general line.

• When we mentioned that we were shopping for a senior with a specific disability, one agent really focused on general issues affecting seniors and which devices were most popular with clients who are seniors, rather than the specific disability that we were calling about. Nonetheless, this extra information was helpful, and the agent in question was eventually able to look up information to answer our questions regarding the disability (cognitive, in this case). While friendly, this agent was the only agent we talked to (on either line) who seemed to be pushing to make a sale.
• In some cases, without prompting, the agents recommended specific phones (and their features) that are designed for accessibility needs (e.g. Doro and Alcatel phones). While in another instance, we were forced to ask many probing questions about devices and the features they offer for those with disabilities. None of this information was provided unprompted.

Agents from both the general and accessibility lines often recommended the Alcatel phone or the Doro Phone, though one agent insisted that the iPhone is best for those with visual disabilities.

Special Offerings

Across both phone lines, the service agents were generally unable to speak to what special services they offered to customers who have a disability beyond the relay service they provide for those who are deaf or hard of hearing, and the $20 discount offered on some phone plans, if the customer meets the eligibility requirements.

• However, some agents we spoke with were unaware of the $20 discount, or didn’t know which plans it could be applied to. The Rogers website seemed to contradict what we were told over the phone about the discount. Rather than being a general discount, it appeared on the website that the discount was only available on “in-market Share Everything” plans.

Bell

As was mentioned earlier, Bell has two phone lines that can be called to gather information: a general line and an accessibility line. When browsing the accessibility pages of Bell’s website, it is fairly easy to learn that they have a dedicated accessibility line. In a big font, they advertise “Need more info? Speak with one of our experts.” Below that, they list the hours, phone numbers, email address, and mailing address to reach the accessibility department.

The service provided by Bell’s general phone line is, for the most part, unsatisfactory.

• The agents do not seem engaged, often seem rushed, and they do not appear motivated to find a solution for our needs.
  • For example, one agent simply said that phones today have accessibility features built in, but that agent did not specify what those features were.
  • For example, when we called about cognitive disabilities, the agent told us that Bell did not have any special services to help with our needs, and they did not have phones with any special features for our needs. They did, however, recommend some easy-to-use phones.
• The agents seemed uninformed as to what features might be helpful for specific disabilities. For example, when we called about physical/mobility disabilities, they did not ask whether the customer was able to text.
  • However, when we called about a hearing disability, they mentioned that the iPhone was hearing aid compatible.
• When the agent on the general customer service line was told that we were calling about accessibility offerings, we expected them to transfer us to the accessibility department or advise us to call the accessibility department ourselves. However, in all but one instance, they did not mention the accessibility department. In fact, they seemed unaware that it existed.
  • In the one instance where they did recommend we call the accessibility line, they mentioned the hours of the department and noted that it was currently closed. However, they did not ask if we had any pressing questions that they could assist with given the accessibility department would not be open until the following morning.

The service on the accessibility line was much better than on the general line. In fact, it was the best service provided across all four WSPs’ phone lines. One agent told us that Bell’s accessibility department prides itself on providing “white glove” service to customers who have a disability, and based on our limited experience, this statement seems accurate. In contrast to the general line, the agents were more familiar with the phones, plans, discounts, and special services offered to their customers with disabilities.

• When we inquired about the department with one of the agents, they mentioned that they took pride in having a small department of 4 people, because they insisted that they want to understand customers and their needs in a more personal way. They also want customers to be able to request a specific agent by name once they have built a relationship. They went as far as to provide a direct phone number to us, in case we would like to speak to the same representative on another day.
• At the start of our calls, the agents asked a lot of questions about the abilities of the customer. For example, when we called about a cognitive disability they asked:
  • Does the customer have arthritis?
  • Would the customer need a traditional mobile phone or have they used smartphones in the past?
  • Is the customer able to adjust the settings on their own, or do they need help?
  • How comfortable does the customer feel with using technology in general?
• The agents were able to speak about Bell’s phone and plan offerings in a way that showed they were knowledgeable about the specific needs of customers with disabilities. For example:
  • When we called about a hearing disability, they immediately asked if we used a hearing aid, and whether we were a member of the Canadian Hearing Society.
  • They suggested that someone who had a visual disability might want a phone with a big data plan, as it would allow more use of Google Maps.
  • When we called about a cognitive disability, they told us about reminder features, photo contact lists, and built-in screen readers. In addition, they recommended that durability should be a consideration when picking a phone.
  • They were able to speak knowledgeably about the benefits and drawbacks of the Doro phones.
  • Without prompting, they told us that they could provide billing information in a large font, if needed, and that this service was offered free of charge.
• They generally went the extra mile to help the customer. For example, they immediately offered to email the forms needed to prove you have a disability and to sign up for their special services. Additionally, they looked up the nearest Bell store to our address, so that we could go in person, to try out their phone recommendations.

Special Offerings

The accessibility department was able to tell us about several special offerings for clients with disabilities (which the general line did not mention). These included:

• A $30 discount on their phone plans
• 2 extra GB of data for any plan that came with at least 1GB to start
• $8 or $16 a month discount on Doro phones (amount of discount depends on which Doro phone the customer chooses)
• Large print and Braille bills
• Relay system
• A 411 exemption
• 30-day return policy. Note that the general line misquoted us on this and told us the return policy was 15 days.

They also insisted that they:

• “Move mountains” if a customer ever needs technical support, a loaner phone, or a phone replacement (due to damage).
• Are understanding when there are missed payments and will do everything that they can to ensure service is not disrupted.

Videotron

Overall, Videotron provided polite and friendly service that made the customer feel as though the agents wanted to help and provide a solution that would be satisfactory.

• However, this service was slow, as the agents consistently had to put us on hold to look up information. They were very knowledgeable about their phones and plans, but their knowledge was general, as opposed to being specific to any disability. For the most part, they were unable to speak knowledgeably about specific phone features or services that might be helpful to those with disabilities. They often insisted that the customer visit a Videotron store to try different phones and learn about their features. If pushed for more information over the phone, they needed to put us on hold and look up the necessary information to answer our questions.
  • For example, when we called about a cognitive disability (e.g. Alzheimer’s) we had to ask if they had features like call alerts and photo contact lists. These features were not mentioned when we asked about phones that might help with the cognitive disability. Even after prompting the customer service agent with our question, their response was that those features could be downloaded. Similarly, when we called about a hearing disability, we had to ask about hearing aid compatibility (they did not mention it unprompted). Once we posed the question, we were told that all phones today are hearing aid compatible.
• In many instances, the customer service agents recommended an Alcatel flip phone. Our impression was that this phone is the “go-to” recommendation for any disability, whether or not it is the best option.
  • When we called about mobility needs, they were unable to recommend a specific phone.

Special Offerings

• When we asked about any special offers or services for those with disabilities, we were told that they offered a discount, but they did not provide specifics.
• When we called about mobility/dexterity disabilities, we were told that they have a disability plan, but it was not available for mobility/dexterity disabilities, just for vision and hearing disabilities. This plan was not offered when we called about cognitive, vision, or hearing disabilities.
• In some cases, they mentioned their 711 relay service, and access to 411.
• In one case, they told us we could book a free 45-minute appointment with a specialist in-store who can show us how to use our new phone.

Recommendations

Accessing Accessibility via the Websites

• All four WSPs should be encouraged to improve the ease of finding the accessibility section of their websites.
  • The accessibility link should be much more prominent on the homepage and should be featured in much bigger font.
  • There should be more than one way to link to the accessibility section of the website. Consideration should be given to adding a link from the “Support” section of the websites.
  • Consideration should be given to mentioning seniors in the title of the accessibility section (e.g. Accessibility and Seniors) given that some seniors would likely benefit from the information and services provided in these sections.
  • The search engines on the websites should be improved to return first page search results that lead customers directly to the full accessibility webpages for all searches containing the words ‘accessibility’, ‘disability’ or ‘senior’. These results should not require the customer to filter through pages of unrelated results before finding the relevant link.
• Rogers’ and Videotron’s websites in particular need improvement. They are difficult to navigate, and likely more so for those who have visual or cognitive disabilities.
• Rogers should be strongly encouraged to add a cognitive section to their accessibility website.
• Bell, Rogers, and Videotron should be encouraged to provide a section in their accessibility webpages that explains common wireless terminology.
  • Telus already provides this information on their website.

Accessibility Services Listed on the Websites

• More detail should be provided on all four WSPs’ websites regarding the availability, limitations, and costs for TTY, Text 911, IP Relay and MRS. This information would provide customers a depth of knowledge on the wide range of services that can be provided for their accessibility needs.
  • This section should also clearly explain which devices are compatible with these services.
• Each provider should feature one area on the accessibility page that includes a list of all of their free services, and how to apply for them. Customers should not be required to search through multiple webpages to find all the free services for which they may be eligible.
  • The same should be done for accessibility services that are offered for a fee.
• Though Rogers, Bell and Telus all offer free sign language interpretation for in-store visits, Rogers and Telus should be encouraged to provide more information on how customers can access this service.
  • Bell provides a form for customers to fill out for this service.
  • Videotron should be encouraged to offer these services, as based on their website, it does not appear that they currently do so.

Device Features Listed on the Websites

• Given that on many of our mystery shopper calls the service agents insisted that we visit their websites to learn more about the various phone features, Telus, Rogers and Videotron must improve this section of their websites. The accessibility section of these websites should have its own device features section (it should not link to the device page for the general public). This section should list the devices that the WSPs recommend, and for each device, it should break down which features would be helpful for each accessibility need.
  • Bell already has this information available on the Accessibility Centre of their website.
  • Rogers should improve their device features lists for each disability, as their lists are the most sparse of the four providers, especially for hearing/speech and mobility/physical disabilities.
    • Information on device features should not be listed in a generic way under the headings ‘Apple’, ‘Blackberry’ and ‘Android’. Instead this information should be device specific. This is critical because, for example, some Android manufactures include enhanced accessibility features compared to stock Android devices (e.g. Samsung’s enhanced screen reader).
    • Furthermore, by listing only ‘Apple’, ‘Blackberry’ and ‘Android’ features, Rogers is missing phones that their customer service agents recommend such as those made by Doro.
  • Videotron should update their website to ensure the device features listed are not the same for each disability (e.g. hearing aid compatibility does not need to be listed in the ‘Impaired Vision’ section).
• For all four WSPs, the device features listed for each disability should be explained. The providers should not assume, for example, that customers will know what ‘speech–to–text’ means or what a ‘TalkBack screen reader’ is.
  • For each feature it should be clear whether that feature is available to be adjusted through the phone’s settings, whether a third party app needs to be downloaded, or a separate add-on device needs to be purchased.
    • For those features that can be adjusted through the phone’s settings, the WSPs should provide instructions that help customers understand how to make those adjustments.
  • The websites need to provide more information regarding what external input devices are, how they can help those with specific accessibility needs, and where they can be purchased.
• Customers who do not have accessibility needs are provided the opportunity on the websites to explore the product they are about to purchase and compare features with other devices. It would be beneficial for customers with disabilities to be given the same opportunity. Customers could be provided with a table that showcases recommended devices for their disability and indicates the accessible features for each device. Alternatively, customers with a disability could be offered the ability to filter for the features they desire, and see the devices that offer those features. Currently, Bell is the only provider that offers this capability.
  • For all four WSPs, the customer service agents should be aware of the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association’s (CWTA) ‘Wireless Accessibility’ webpage, which explains important device feature considerations for each disability, lists the accessibility features of a wide variety of mobile phones, and allows the user to search for the optimal device for their needs using a variety of filters.
    • The WSPs should be encouraged to use this resource as part of their customer service agent training.
    • The customer service agents of all four WSPs should also recommend this resource to customers as a means to help them select the best mobile phone features and devices for their needs.

Phone Line Customer Service

• Aside from Bell’s Accessibility Line there is significant opportunity for each WSP to improve their customer service for seniors and persons with disabilities:
  • It is critical that there be more consistency regarding the customer service agents’ knowledge of their WSPs’ offerings for persons with disabilities.
  • Additional training should be provided to customer service agents to ensure they are more knowledgeable regarding the needs of those with disabilities. The customer should not need to prompt the agent about specific phone features, services, or phone plans that might be helpful for them.
    • For example, if the customer has a vision disability the agent should ask (among other questions) whether the customer would like Braille or large print bills and whether having a phone with magnifying screen would be helpful.
    • Every call into Bell’s general line regarding accessibility should be forwarded to their accessibility line (during their working hours). Bell’s general line agents should also be adequately trained to handle general accessibility calls outside of the accessibility line’s hours.
  • Though Rogers advertises that they have an accessibility phone line on their website, based on our limited experience, the service provided to the customer through that line is not sufficiently specialized. If Rogers is going to advertise an accessibility line, based on our limited experience, it is recommended that:
    • They ensure the customer service agents receive enhanced training regarding the needs of persons with disabilities.
    • They review how the accessibility line is directed in their phone centre to ensure the customer service agents are aware when an accessibility line call is being directed to them.
• Overall, there appears to be a need to encourage the providers to offer specialized mobility plans for those with disabilities. These plans should consider the special needs of those with each disability (e.g. unlimited minutes for those with visual disabilities, phone replacement plans for those with mobility/dexterity disabilities as they may drop their phones more frequently, etc.).
  • Though the providers offer some discounts for seniors and those with accessibility needs, Videotron and Bell appear to be the only providers that offer specific plans for those with disabilities. However, these plans appear to have significant limitations, as Videotron’s plan is not offered to those with mobility disabilities, and Bell’s plan is only for those who are using one of the Doro phones. Ideally, these plans would have fewer limitations and would be more consistently mentioned when customers who have a disability inquire about their offerings.
• If a provider has a program, service, or discount that is unique to them, they should advertise it more prominently. Based on our limited experience, these unique offerings seem to include:
  • Telus’ Assistive Tech For Good Program (currently only available in British Columbia).
  • Bell’s Mobile Accessibility App for those who are blind or partially sighted.
  • Bell’s dedicated Accessibility Phone Line appears to be unique in terms of the agents’ knowledge and the level of service. It is important that Bell not only advertise this more prominently, but also that they inform their customer service agents who work on their general phone line of this line and insist that they forward those inquiring about accessibility services , as well as seniors, to the accessibility department.
  • Bell’s ability to provide billing information on CD.
  • Bell’s $30 discount on phone plans for persons with disabilities. Based on our limited experience, this appears to currently only be offered over the phone. It should also be mentioned on Bell’s accessibility webpage.

Digital Advertising

WSPs need to provide more information to those with accessibility needs through their advertising. This is important because:

• It would help create more awareness that the WSPs have products and services that can assist customers with accessibility needs.
• Those with disabilities, and seniors, may not be aware that there are devices with special features that could assist them.
• Customers with disabilities may not be aware that there are special services and discounts they may be eligible for.

Appendix

The URL of each advertisement is located below.

Bell

Bell is the only provider that had an ad specifically aimed at persons with disabilities. These print ads were featured on the Canadian Council of the Blind Newsletter (January 2019 and May 2018). For the January 2019 ad, users will need to scroll through the homepage to find it.

• Canadian Council of the Blind Newsletter May 2018
• Canadian Council of the Blind Newsletter January 2019

Telus

We were unable to find any Telus ads aimed specifically at the target groups. However, we were able to find several ads that were inclusive, featuring seniors and those with disabilities.

Inclusive YouTube Videos

• In this video, there is some senior citizen representation
• In this video, there is information about inclusiveness and diversity
• In this video, there is some accessibility representation in the campaign to end bullying

Rogers

We were unable to find any specific advertising from Rogers aimed at the target groups.

• In this video, there is information about customer support, but none about accessibility support and services. We see this as a missed opportunity to mention accessibility support and services

Date modified:

2019-09-13