Disproportionate Burden and Accessible Alternatives

Table of Contents

The European Accessibility Act (EAA) requires that people with disabilities can access services “on an equal basis with others.” As venues evaluate their compliance strategies, understanding the relationship between disproportionate burden provisions and accessible alternatives becomes crucial for making informed decisions that align with the EAA’s foundational principle: to enable accessibility, not to find excuses to avoid it.

Understanding the Disproportionate Burden Clause #

The EAA’s disproportionate burden provision, detailed in Annex VI, exists as a carefully limited exception, not a standard compliance pathway. Organizations that invoke this clause without genuinely exploring accessible alternatives face significant liability risks under EAA penalties. The Act’s core philosophy centers on proactive accessibility implementation rather than creative avoidance strategies.

As EAA implementation progresses, venue operators must recognize that innovative accessible alternatives frequently eliminate the need for burden exemptions entirely. When effective digital solutions exist – such as GoodMaps’ comprehensive indoor navigation system – venues can achieve full EAA compliance while often improving service delivery across their entire customer base.

A Smart Alternative: Leveraging Connected Infrastructure #

Many interactive equipment installations across airports, railway stations, and similar venues already feature internet connectivity. This Internet of Things (IoT) infrastructure creates unprecedented opportunities for app-level accessibility controls that can transform existing systems without wholesale equipment replacement.

Proportionate Response Principles #

The EAA doesn’t require venues to “catch-all” and replace every piece of equipment – such an approach would indeed be disproportionate. Instead, organizations should systematically evaluate whether suitable compromises exist that offer genuinely equal alternatives. In the vast majority of cases involving connected equipment, the answer is almost certainly yes.

For example, venues struggling with wayfinding accessibility can implement solutions like GoodMaps, which provides comprehensive indoor navigation through smartphone technology, requiring no infrastructure modifications while delivering superior accessibility outcomes.

Real-World Applications of Smart Accessibility #

  • Airport Operations: Physical check-in kiosks and bag drop machines with internet connectivity can integrate with smartphone apps, providing equivalent functionality through accessible interfaces.
  • Railway Station Services: Connected ticket machines and information displays can pair with mobile applications, delivering accessible service without requiring physical equipment overhauls.
  • Banking and Retail: ATMs and self-service terminals with network connections can offer app-based transaction preparation and completion, meeting accessibility requirements while serving customers who may no longer carry traditional accessibility tools like 3.5mm headphones.

The Cost of Avoiding Accessibility #

Organizations that reflexively reach for disproportionate burden provisions without exploring equal alternatives expose themselves to substantial EAA penalty liability. The regulatory framework explicitly expects proactive accessibility solutions, not creative exemption strategies.

  • Legal Reality Check: The EAA’s enforcement mechanisms specifically target organizations that fail to demonstrate genuine efforts toward accessible service delivery. Insufficient preparation, lack of accessibility knowledge, or preference for other business priorities do not constitute legitimate grounds for burden claims – and regulators know this.

Annex VI Assessment Requirements #

When legitimate disproportionate burden situations arise, Annex VI requires organizations to complete comprehensive evaluations including:

  • Cost Proportionality Analysis: Compare accessibility investment requirements to overall organizational resources and capacity. This assessment must demonstrate that costs would be excessive relative to the organization’s financial situation.
  • Benefit Evaluation: Analyze accessibility improvements relative to investment required, considering both direct benefits to users with disabilities and broader operational impacts.
  • Operational Impact Assessment: Evaluate effects on business operations, service delivery capacity, and existing customer service standards.

Documentation and Notifications #

Organizations invoking disproportionate burden must:

  • Document assessments thoroughly with detailed financial evidence.
  • Notify relevant authorities in each EU country where services are offered.
  • Conduct quinquennial reviews with updated data and circumstances.
  • Apply narrowly to specific requirements, not accessibility broadly.
  • Provide maximum feasible accessibility within available resources.

Strategic Implementation Excellence #

Successful accessible alternatives must provide equivalent functionality and independence – services “on an equal basis with others” rather than substitute services. This means:

  • Complete Functional Equivalence: Users access the same level of service independence as any other visitor.
  • Reliable Performance: Systems operate consistently without dependencies or limitations.
  • Universal Design: Solutions work effectively across diverse disabilities and technology comfort levels.
  • Continuous Validation: Regular evaluation ensures real-world effectiveness.

For wayfinding accessibility specifically, solutions like GoodMaps demonstrate how venues can exceed basic EAA requirements by providing sub-meter positioning and turn-by-turn navigation that often surpasses traditional physical signage systems.

The Business Case for Proactive Solutions #

Companies implementing effective accessible alternatives often discover they’ve exceeded EAA requirements while achieving better outcomes than traditional compliance approaches. This strategy offers:

  • Legal certainty without complex Annex VI documentation requirements.
  • Superior user experience that frequently provides better accessibility than retrofitted infrastructure.
  • Operational efficiency through integrated systems that streamline operations while improving accessibility.
  • Future adaptability as digital platforms evolve with changing standards and user needs.

Strategic Considerations for Compliance #

Rather than viewing accessibility as a burden to minimize, forward-thinking venues recognize it as an opportunity to innovate while serving broader communities. The EAA’s fundamental principle is implementation, not avoidance.The most successful approaches:

  • Focus on user outcomes rather than minimum compliance requirements.
  • Invest in solutions that benefit all users, not just those with disabilities.
  • Plan for scalability and evolution as accessibility standards develop.
  • Document genuine equivalence rather than pursuing complex exemption processes.

For navigation and wayfinding challenges specifically, venues should evaluate whether infrastructure-free solutions could provide superior accessibility outcomes before considering burden exemptions.

Before Pursuing Disproportionate Burden Claims #

Organizations should systematically evaluate:

  • Available Technology Solutions: Can connected systems or apps provide equivalent service access?
  • Infrastructure-Free Alternatives: Do solutions like digital navigation eliminate the need for physical modifications?
  • Cost-Benefit Reality: Would alternative approaches provide better outcomes at comparable or lower cost?
  • Long-term Flexibility: Will digital solutions adapt better to evolving accessibility standards?

Key Takeaways #

The disproportionate burden provision requires extensive documentation and should only be considered when no viable alternative exists. Digital solutions often provide superior accessibility compared to retrofitting physical infrastructure, while proactive accessibility strategies demonstrate organizational values and frequently prove more economical than exemption processes.

Most importantly, the EAA exists to enable accessibility, not to provide sophisticated avoidance mechanisms. Venues that embrace innovative solutions – whether comprehensive platforms like GoodMaps for navigation challenges or IoT-enabled apps for equipment access – consistently achieve better outcomes for users while ensuring legal compliance.

For organizations seeking to understand how accessible digital solutions can address specific EAA requirements effectively while avoiding the complexity of Annex VI procedures, exploring proven accessibility technologies represents the most strategic path forward.

Updated on August 7, 2025