Vol. XXXIV, No. 9 DOJ Website Accessibility GuidanceI. Introduction The Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued guidance providing additional clarity about website accessibility and how businesses can ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The guidance provides examples of website accessibility barriers, clarifies when the ADA requires web content to be accessible and offers tips for improving website accessibility. The guidance describes how businesses open to the public can make sure that their websites are accessible to people with disabilities as required by the ADA. II. Examples of Website Accessibility Barriers The ways in which websites are designed and set up can create unnecessary barriers that make it difficult or impossible for people with disabilities to use websites. The guidance provides the following examples of website accessibility barriers:
III. When the ADA Requires Web Content to be Accessible Businesses that are open to the public (Title III)
IV. How to Make Web Content Accessible to People with Disabilities The DOJ does not have a regulation setting out detailed standards, but the Department's long-standing interpretation of the general nondiscrimination and effective communication provisions applies to web accessibility. Businesses can currently choose how they will ensure that the programs, services and goods they provide online are accessible to people with disabilities. Existing technical standards provide helpful guidance concerning how to ensure accessibility of website features. These include the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and the Section 508 Standards, which the federal government uses for its own websites. Check out the resources section for more references. Even though businesses have flexibility in how they comply with the ADA's general requirements of nondiscrimination and effective communication, they still must ensure that the programs, services and goods that they provide to the public - including those provided online - are accessible to people with disabilities. Businesses should consider a variety of website features when ensuring that their websites are accessible. The resources section has links to organizations that explain how to make websites accessible. Examples of what businesses should do to make websites accessible include (but are not limited to) the following practices:
Full-Text PDF The foregoing Compliance Update is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. As a reminder, the NBA general counsel is the attorney for the Nebraska Bankers Association, not its member banks. The general counsel is available to assist members with finding resources to help answer their questions. However, for specific legal advice about specific situations, members must consult and retain their own attorney.
Vol. XXXIV, No. 7 Mandated Vaccine ExemptionsThe Nebraska Legislature has passed LB 906, which requires employers who mandate COVID-19 vaccinations to grant a vaccine exemption for medical or religious purposes. The new language took effect on February 28. Under LB 906, any employer that requires its job applicants or employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 must grant an exemption from vaccination for individuals who provide a completed vaccine exemption form, seeking an exemption on the basis of a medical or religious reason. The form is available from the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services and can be obtained at: https://dhhs.ne.gov/Documents/COVID-19-Vaccine-Exemption-Form.pdf. The vaccine exemption form allows an individual to declare either: 1) that a healthcare practitioner has provided the individual with a signed, written statement that, in the healthcare practitioner's opinion, receiving a COVID-19 vaccine is either medically contraindicated for the individual or medical necessity requires the individual to delay receiving such a vaccine; or 2) that receiving a COVID-19 vaccine would conflict with the individual's sincerely held religious belief, practice or observance. Individuals seeking an exemption for medical reasons must also provide a signed, written statement from a healthcare practitioner identified in the completed form. While an employer may require its exempted employees to be periodically tested for COVID-19, the testing must be conducted at the employer's expense. The new law also allows employers to require its exempted employees to wear or use personal protective equipment provided at the expense of the employer. Full-Text PDF The foregoing Compliance Update is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. As a reminder, the NBA general counsel is the attorney for the Nebraska Bankers Association, not its member banks. The general counsel is available to assist members with finding resources to help answer their questions. However, for specific legal advice about specific situations, members must consult and retain their own attorney.
Vol. XXXIV, No. 8 CFPB-Consumer Reviews-Unfair and Deceptive ActsI. Introduction The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has issued a bulletin to remind regulated entities of the requirements of the CFPB and explain how the CFPB intends to exercise its enforcement and supervisory authorities when firms frustrate the ability of consumers to post honest reviews of products and services that they use. Firms taking such actions may be engaged in conduct prohibited by the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). II. Violations of the Consumer Financial Protection Act Sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA prohibit a covered person or service provider from engaging in an "unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice" that is "in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service." There are a number of ways that covered persons or service providers could violate this prohibition by interfering with consumer reviews.
III. Conclusion In summary, covered persons and service providers are liable under the CFPA if they deceive consumers using restrictions on consumer reviews that are unenforceable under the Consumer Review Fairness Act, if they unfairly deprive consumers of information by using such restrictions, or if they deceive consumers who read reviews about the nature of those reviews. If the CFPB identifies a violation of the CFPA, it intends to use its authorities to hold the violators accountable. Full-Text PDF The foregoing Compliance Update is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. As a reminder, the NBA general counsel is the attorney for the Nebraska Bankers Association, not its member banks. The general counsel is available to assist members with finding resources to help answer their questions. However, for specific legal advice about specific situations, members must consult and retain their own attorney.
Vol. XXXIV, No. 6 Non-Bank Marketing Restrictions: Nebraska State LawSome customers of Nebraska banks have recently received mailings relating to “matters of importance relating to their mortgage.” These letters typically include the name of the bank, loan amount and loan closing date, information that is readily available through public records; they also generally include some form of solicitation for a product or service offered by the company sending the communication. These communications can be misleading and generally are confusing to customers of the bank who may believe they are being contacted by their lender or that their lender has shared or released information regarding their loan to a third party. These types of misleading communications or solicitations were more prevalent in the early 2000s and resulted in the NBA seeking legislation to place restrictions on these types of activities. The provisions of Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 8-2501 to 8-2505 are designed to address of these types of solicitations by non-banks (See, NBA Compliance Handbook, Volume II, Bank Promotion, Non-Bank Marketing Restrictions: Nebraska State Law). Section 8-2501 lists the requirements for using the name of a non-affiliated bank in a solicitation for business. The statute requires that a clear and conspicuous statutorily prescribed notice of: be given that the sender of the communication or solicitation is not affiliated with the bank, the name of which is referenced in the communication or solicitation. The statute requires a “clear and conspicuous” notice of “non-affiliation” to be of the same font size used to identify the financial institution and that the name of financial institution must be in close proximity to that notice including on an envelope or through an envelope window containing the statement. The statute also requires the non-affiliation disclosure to specifically state that the solicitation is not authorized by the financial institution. The Nebraska Department of Banking and Finance (Department) has investigated a number of these solicitations and responded in cases in which the company making the solicitation has failed to comply with the requirements of §8-2501. In these cases, the Department has directed the solicitor to either immediately comply with the requirements of §8-2501 to 8-2505 or to stop advertising using the name of an unaffiliated financial institution in Nebraska. The Department is authorized to take administrative actions or to refer the matter to other law enforcement agencies in Nebraska for a failure to respond to the Department’s directive. Full-Text PDF The foregoing Compliance Update is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. As a reminder, the NBA general counsel is the attorney for the Nebraska Bankers Association, not its member banks. The general counsel is available to assist members with finding resources to help answer their questions. However, for specific legal advice about specific situations, members must consult and retain their own attorney.
|
STAY CONNECTED |
nEBRASKA bANKERS aSSOCIATION233 South 13th Street, Suite 700
PO Box 80008 Lincoln, NE 68501-0008 402-474-1555 Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy |