In the Cottage country County of Scugog Port Perry is a destination for many folks, even the Movie industry used it for a backdrop to a 2004 film, Welcome to Moosport.

Jesters Court Pub and Eatery is a quaint little Restaurant located just off Simcoe Street on the main drag in Port Perry and has taken a step towards complying with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Customer Service Standard (CSS).

The CSS states that Businesses must allow people to use their assistive devices to access their goods and services and that is exactly what Jesters Court has done.

In taking a step towards compliance Jesters Court now has its Restaurant posted on aMENU in an accessible format see http://www.amenu.ca/jesters-court-pub-eatery/.

Not only is their Menu posted on aMENU accessible to assistive devices of all kinds including screen readers, iPads, now it has an automatic detection for mobile devices.

People can access the menu from home, on the road and Jesters Court also has WiFi allowing you to view their menu with your own device, I plan on using my iPad mini next time I eat at their establishment, which I might add has excellent food.

It might seem like a trivial issue to some but not having to have someone else read Restaurant menus to me goes a long way to my Independence, I dont have to ask the Server to read it to me and especially my Wife, people seem to have the impression that our Partners are also our Personal Assistants and nothing could be further from the truth, it isn’t their duty to look after us hand and foot, Society has a duty to do so and that’s why we have the AODA.

Although the AODA is progressing at a disappointingly slow pace any steps towards an Accessible Ontario for All its Citizens is at least one step forward and not backwards.

Thank You Jesters Court Pub and Eatery!

Any Restaurant owners reading this article and wishing to have their menus added to aMENU, drop us an email at admin@amenu.ca and we’ll give the first 10 Restaurants a 3 month trial period, or if you want your favourite Restaurant registered let them know of this offer.

(This article was originally run in the Ontario Restaurant Hotel & Motel Association (ORHMA)
Newsletter, see link below.)

As an avid Restaurant customer my Wife and I love to visit different Restaurants and try different
types of food, in the past before I lost my vision I could read the menu myself and order such things
as Alligator, Kung Pow and so on. It was a pleasant experience, my Wife would read her menu and I
would read mine.

Unfortunately after I lost my vision I was no longer able to do it, I cant see large print , read Braille
and too many online menus aren’t accessible to my screen reader. I didn’t want to burden my Wife
by asking her to read the whole menu to me, that is when I decided there had to be a better way
and so I created aMENU to bridge this gap.

As many Restaurant owners in Ontario are aware the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act
(AODA) is now the law. As Owners might also be aware they need to allow those of us who have
Assistive Devices such as screen readers the ability to access their Goods an Services, menus for
example, many people cant read Braille or see large print.

Like all Disabled people, Independence is of the utmost importance, I dont want your Server to read
the menu to me and while they are expected to, I can appreciate your Staff not wanting to read it to
me either, especially if it is a very busy time of day and I want them to go over it twice, something I
did when I was able to see.

That is why I created www.amenu.ca, a way of achieving Independence for those who want it, a
website where Restaurant owners can have their menus posted in an accessible format (they can
update it themselves if they wish) then it can be accessed with Assistive Devices (screen reader,
smart phone etc). For that matter anyone could access it with a Mobile device.

But did you know that an Accessible menu will also increase your Search Engine ranking?

Over the last 4 months I have been watching my Stats on the site and was quite unexpectedly
amazed at how the traffic to the Boston Pizza menu ( www.amenu.ca/boston-pizza/ ) had grown and
so to did the Google search ranking.

I initially posted the menu in mid January of this year where it started off at 11 hits for the month
and was no where to be found in a Google search for ” Boston Pizza menu “, February went to 43
and again, no ranking on Googgle.

March things started to turn around, the visits jumped to 351 for the month and a Google search for
the same string as above started at 8th place then to 6th.

Visits skyrocketed in the next 2 months, April brought in 1,504 and as of this writing May registered
4,261 visits and ranks in second place, right behind Boston Pizza’s main site. Type in Boston Pizza
accessible restaurant menu and it is first.

By my calculations at least 2 thirds are repeat visitors, now that they know an easily accessible
version exists.

As an Accessible web developer I have long known that Accessibility is good for search engine
ranking but was pleasantly surprised at these results.

Not all restaurants have a profile like Boston Pizza, however, getting your Restaurant ranked high in
a search engine will undoubtedly increase your customer base and after all, in this digital age of
accessibility getting your Restaurant in the top 10 is not only good for business, you are also
complying with the AODA.

So far this year, Chef and Owner Hans of Macy’s Diner and Delicatessen, has had 466 visits to his
accessible menu( www.amenu.ca/macys-diner-delicatessen/ )many of them click throughs from the
aMENU link on his own site.

On May 23 of this year 360 The Restaurant at the CN Tower added their Accessible Summer 2012
menu www.amenu.ca/360-restaurant/.

In an earlier trial period within 3 weeks they were on Google’s first page and I fully expect that to
happen again once Google knows it’s back. In most searches for the menus available on
www.amenu.ca you will find they rank with, or higher than other similar websites that have been
around for a lot longer.

To view a presentation visit www.amenu.ca/presentation today and get your Restaurant ranked on
the first page of Google, increase your Client base and comply with the Law at the same time!

Reproduced from http://www.orhma.com/MembershipServices/Publications/Insider/Vol12Issue12.aspx#17

360 The Restaurant at the top of the CN Tower has shown its commitment to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Customer Service Standard (CSS) by having its Summer 2012 menu added to aMENU, the Accessible Menu website.

As the CSS states:

(3) Without limiting subsections (1) and (2), the policies must deal with the use
of assistive devices by persons with disabilities to obtain, use or benefit from the provider’s goods or services or the availability, if any, of other measures which enable them to do so. O. Reg. 429/07, s. 3 (3).

While some have argued to me that it isn’t a requirement to have a Restaurant’s Menu in an Accessible format on the Web I beg to differ.

People like myself are unable to see Large Print or read Braille, the only current options offered by many Restaurants, what is left is for the Server to read it to me and that isn’t ‘Equal Access” according to the Human Rights Code or the CSS which clearly states that the service must be available to my assistive device by :

“the availability, if any, of other measures which enable them to do so”.

aMENU is that OTHER Measure!

Not only am I able to access the Menu in an accessible format with my Screen reader, it is also available to Mobile devices, which according to the websites stats accounts for about 30% of the traffic.

CN Tower Director of Marketing and Communications, Lisa Tompkins, to her credit understands the need for this and aMENU is grateful for the opportunity to post the 360 The Restaurant Menu in an accessible format.

The aMENU website also offers other viewing options such as regular and large print in black text on a white background or white text on a black background for those who like high contrast and even off white for those with Dyslexia.

There is also an option for Mobile devices which would account for the 30% of people accessing it using iPhones and other portable devices.

Menus can be accessed from home by whatever Assistive Device is being used, on the road with Smart Phones that can also read out loud to the end user or right in the Restaurant itself.

Having your restaurant menu on the website is also great for your Google ranking.

At this writing and being on the site for a little over 2 weeks the CN Tower Restaurant menu shows up on Google’s first page at number 8/9 with the search words in any combination “cn tower 360 restaurant menu”, add “Accessible” to the mix and it comes up first. If it trends like other menus on the site it’ll be in 2nd place in no time, even without using accessible in the search terms.

To view a Presentation on aMENU visit www.amenu.ca/presentation.

Your next DOJ investigation or ADA class action could be just a mouse click away!
By Jim Butler and the Global Hospitality Group®
Hotel Lawyers | Authors of www.HotelLawBlog.com
30 May 2012

Hotel ADA defense and compliance lawyer: ADA litigation over website accessibility is poised to explode.

How many lawsuits or claims have been filed by private plaintiffs and the Department of Justice (DOJ) against property owners under the Americans with Disabilities Act or ADA?

The latest figures show that more than 15,500 such ADA lawsuits or claims have been filed. And the pace is about to pick up in a big way.

My partner Marty Orlick, who heads JMBM’s ADA compliance and defense team, has defended more than 500 ADA claims all over the country. Marty warns that we may be about to see a tidal wave of Cyber Accessibility claims — lawsuits about reservation systems, hotel websites and related communications facilities.

Why could there be a big slug of these ADA lawsuits over websites? Marty says that there are several reasons:

1.First, these lawsuits will be very easy for plaintiffs to work up. The plaintiffs do not need any site inspection, experts or research. They can just surf the web from the convenience of their homes or offices. Marty says the “surf by” complaints could dwarf the “drive by” ADA lawsuits that looked for missing accessible parking spaces and other readily visible shortcomings.

2.Second, some owners and operators have not been paying enough attention to this issue. They have had their attention elsewhere, such as on operating fundamentals, labor costs and ADA pool lift requirements.

3.Both the DOJ and private plaintiffs have had tremendous success with website accessibility lawsuits under the ADA (see the discussion below and related articles about the Hilton International consent decree and the Charles Schwab class action case), and they are growing impatient for compliance.

4.In addition, a lack of clear industry standards and misinformed marketing staff have lulled some into thinking they are already in compliance when that is not so.

5.Finally, some owners and operators have not recognized ADA compliance for the high priority it demands. They have not appreciated how costly ADA litigation and defense can be, and how compliance is so much cheaper than defense.

So here are some timely tips from Marty Orlick, a pro who really understands the ADA compliance and defense. . .

Cyber Accessibility — What every hotel owner and operator needs to know about the ADA, websites and the internet.

by Martin H. Orlick, Esq. | ADA Defense and Compliance Lawyer

When the ADA was adopted in 1990, the internet was in its infancy and no one gave any consideration to what we have coined “Cyber Accessibility” — not
the U.S. Access Board, the DOJ, nor advocates for the blind. But now, with the explosion of the internet and some high profile developments we will discuss, the DOJ and advocacy groups are increasing their efforts to compel businesses to assure that their websites are accessible to the visually-disabled. “Drive-by” lawsuits are becoming so passé. Today, a DOJ investigation or lawsuit is just a mouse click away.

In our May 4, 2012 article, we alerted our readers that Charles Schwab, the nation’s leading securities broker-dealer, reached a settlement with a disability rights organization in which Schwab agreed to implement the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) (discussed below) to assure that its website is navigable by blind and low vision clients. See, ADA compliance and defense lawyer alert: Charles Schwab settles claim over website accessibility

The Schwab settlement has far reaching implications for the hospitality industry and all other places of public accommodation. The advocacy group which threatened to sue Schwab, is led by the same attorney who, in 2000, “persuaded” the nation’s leading banks to install “talking ATMs.” Today, nearly every ATM in the country provides voice activated communications elements to assist blind and low vision bank customers to navigate the machines. Websites are the next frontier of ADA litigation.

THE TWO BASIC WEBSITE ISSUES FOR HOTELS.
There are basically two aspects of website access applicable to hotels; website content, and navigability by blind, low vision and cognitively disabled persons.

WEBSITE CONTENT

For guidance on the content of hotel websites we need look no further that the DOJ’s recent consent decree with Hilton Worldwide, Inc. Hilton agreed to make its Reservation Systems, whether telephonic or internet-based, accessible so that that individuals with mobility and hearing disabilities can make reservations for accessible rooms, with the opportunity to guarantee the reservation. Each Hilton Brand is required to accurately update its guestroom inventory and availability in the Reservations System. The information not only must identify the types of rooms which are accessible, but for each room type, must also identify its accessibility features, such as the number of beds, size of bed(s), roll-in shower or tub, visual alarms, executive level rooms, suites and views.

See Hilton’s ADA Settlement with the Department of Justice: Precedent-setting agreement delivers more than removing architectural barriers.

NAVIGATION OF WEBSITES BY VISUALLY-IMPAIRED INDIVIDUALS.

The second issue is whether your website is useable by blind, low vision and cognatively disabled persons. It is estimated that of the nearly 10 million visually impaired people in the United States, 1.5 million use assistive technologies such as screen reader computer technology to access websites and communicate via the internet. Screen reader technology converts website text to an audio format by reading the display screens and by guiding the vision-impaired user through the website prompts.

Accessible websites provide computer codes that are compatible with screen reader software. There are more than 50 distinct screen reader software programs commonly used depending on the nature of the user’s disability and their operating platforms. Selecting a program that will be best for your website requires expert consideration. Because of the sensitive nature of this technology, what may appear to be an unimportant or irrelevant feature to a website developer may make the difference in a disabled person being able to navigate your website.

In the Schwab case, the client, coincidentally a computer software developer, day traded on Schwab’s website for years. For some undisclosed reason, perhaps due to changes within the website or perhaps within the client’s computer system, she could no longer navigate the website and execute trades. Changes to accommodate one type of screen reader may inadvertently disable access and use by another.

The current internet environment is changing almost daily–internet sites for personal banking and third party reservation systems are now commonly accessed through mobile devices such as SmartPhones and Tablets, using a variety of browsers on an ever increasing variety of operating platforms. Cloud Computing and SaaS have created unique needs for many individuals, who in turn may utilize screen reader technology designed to accommodate their individual production environment, making a “one-size fits all” software of hardware solution very difficult to achieve.

The more likely scenario for lack of website access which prevents potential guests from accessing your website to learn about your hotel’s offerings or to book a reservation online, is that your website was never designed to be accessible by persons who are blind or have low vision in the first instance.

Since the internet is a primary point of access to goods and services for many individuals, including the vision-impaired, it is hardly surprising that online accessibility has become a major focus for DOJ enforcement proceedings and private advocacy group lawsuits. Such enforcement actions and litigation can expose your business to multi-million dollar penalties, damages and substantial legal and expert fees to defend. Unfortunately, the lack of certainty in online accessibility standards has made it difficult for businesses to confidently select their technologies and rely on the advice of their third-party reservation vendors. Trusting standard website development, without involving internet accessibility specialists, will often fail to produce an accessible website.

THE WORLD WIDE WEB CONSORTIUM (W3C)

Although the Web Accessibility Initiative and other groups have been advocating for standardization for some time, no written guidelines for website accessibility have been adopted by the private sector. All that exists are conceptual aspirations which provide little certainty, especially in the presence of ever-changing technologies. Because it is far simpler for the U.S. Access Board and the DOJ to develop scoping and technical standards for the “built environment,” such as parking or guestroom technical standards, than it is to develop technical standards for the ever-changing intricacies of the internet, there are currently no standard templates for website developers to follow.

The W3C publishes the WCAG, which is a broad set of web access guidelines. The WCAG is the most highly developed set of guidelines for website accessibility and is being used by the federal government and many in the private sector; however, these guidelines have not been formally adopted by the DOJ. Although the DOJ has indicated that it views the WCAG guidelines as the most comprehensive, it has not adopted them for all public accommodations.

Given the high stakes involved, and because of the 2010 ADA Standards’ requirements which became mandatory March 15, 2012, it is now more important than ever for hotels to evaluate their online interface for accessibility and implement a template and protocol to develop accessible websites. Thereafter, it is equally important to regularly evaluate and update your accessibility technology. The requirement for effective communication is equally applicable to other means of communication with customers and potential customers, such as Telecommunication Relay Services (TRS) and effective auxiliary aids and services.

THE APPLICABLE LEGAL REGULATIONS

The ADA guarantees equal access for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, like hotels, restaurants, golf courses and sports facilities. It is very important to understand that the ADA is civil rights legislation, not a national building code enforcement act.

Violations of the ADA can be enforced by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. We have been following DOJ settlements for years. In 2011, we observed the largest DOJ monetary settlements by far. The significant exposure for failing to provide effective communicative services that are accessible to the disabled, is dramatically illustrated by recent enforcement settlements against Hilton Worldwide, Inc., Wells Fargo Bank and Bank of America. The ADA also created a private right of action for disabled individuals and advocacy groups to obtain injunctive relief (barrier removal) and attorneys fees and costs. Some states, such as California also permit a private plaintiff to recover damages.

The DOJ’s policy and recent court decisions on website accessibility state that the ADA applies to public accommodations whenever they correspond or transact business via the internet. As a result, the “effective communication” rule applies to those businesses that use the internet as a means of communication for the sale of their goods and services to the public. These businesses must be prepared to present their goods and services thorough an accessible medium. It is critically important for hotels and other businesses to evaluate and implement written policies, practices and procedures for the content and navigable features of their websites.

SOME NOTEWORTHY EXAMPLES

The landscape of disabled access litigation related to online services has significantly changed and expanded over the past decade. Initially, the internet was an area of little concern as courts uniformly held that the ADA applied to “brick and mortar” facilities, not to cyberspace. This has changed and online accessibility is presently, and will continue to be, an area of significant investigation and litigation.

Some noteworthy examples include:

• In 1999 the National Federation of the Blind sued America Online because its website was inaccessible to the blind. A settlement was reached and AOL changed its website to accommodate screen reader software technology.
• In 2003, the New York Attorney General, investigated Priceline.com and Ramada.com contending that their respective websites were inaccessible to the blind and low vision customers. They too installed screen reader software.
• In October, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California certified a national class in National Federation of the Blind vs. Target Corp., holding for the first time that online retailers must provide website access to disabled persons. Target settled the case, paid $6 Million and agreed to install screen reader software so that online customers and potential customers who are visually impaired have access to Target’s website.
• In 2010, Hilton Worldwide, Inc. entered into a comprehensive ADA settlement decree with the DOJ in which it agreed to enhance accessibility to its telephonic and internet-based Reservation Systems. In addition to paying a monetary penalty, Hilton agreed to modify and maintain all of its websites to comply with the WCAG version 2.0, Level A success criteria.

CONCLUSION

As with most businesses today, hotels communicate with their guests and potential guests through the internet. Your websites, and those of third-party booking agents put “heads in your beds.” Many of these guests and potential guests are visually, hearing or cognitively disabled and rely upon the internet and screen reader software to choose hotels, plan meetings and social events and make online reservations. You need to ask yourself whether your website is designed to be accessible to the disabled public. It is good for business and, it is the law.

Unfortunately, there are no established standards for website accessibility because the DOJ withdrew its latest Notice of Proposed Rule Making for website standards. Therefore, since your secrets are only safe with an attorney, we recommend that you retain an experienced ADA lawyer with Cyber Accessibility expertise to guide you through the process. When your ADA counsel hires the website accessibility specialist, all evaluations and recommendations may remain confidential. We believe this is the most effective way to prevent costly governmental investigations and protracted litigation.

Reproduced from http://hotellaw.jmbm.com/2012/05/cyber_accessibility_litigation_explosion.html

April 2, 2012
by Mara Goltsman
(Originally published May, 2008)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Camarillo v. Carrols Corp. (2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2814) (2d Cir. 2008), issued a decision advancing the rights of the disabled by holding that a legally blind patron was discriminated against at several fast food restaurants due to the restaurants’ employees’ failure to read the menu pursuant to her request in violation of the American with Disabilities Act and New York Executive Law.

The Court vacated the lower court’s decision, which dismissed the Complaint for lack of standing. The Court determined that Plaintiff established a pattern of a violation of the ADA and New York Executive Law (the decision discussed the fact that the scope of New York State’s disability discrimination provisions is similar to that of the ADA) and remanded for further proceedings. This decision stands for the proposition that restaurants are required to ensure that their menu options are effectively communicated to legally blind customers, in this instance, by training their employees in the appropriate methods of assisting such customers.

The Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted in 1990, serves to prohibit discrimination against those with disabilities in areas which include employment and public accommodations. The protection of the ADA applies to an individual with a disability or someone associated with such an individual. Specifically, the ADA of 1990, Title III (42 U.S.C. § 12182 (a)) provides that: “No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.” Discrimination is defined by Title III as “a failure to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the entity can demonstrate that taking such steps would fundamentally alter the nature of the good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation being offered or would result in an undue burden.” 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).

The typical scenario for a claim under Title III applies to the physical layout of a building, i.e., where an individual in a wheelchair is unable to enter because of a lack of appropriate accommodation (Pickern v. Holiday Quality Foods Inc., 293 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2002)), or a prohibition against allowing a service animal into a building (Stan v. Walmart Stores, 111 F.Supp.2d 119 (N.D.N.Y. 2000)). The alleged discrimination in Camarillo was a new area that had not been previously addressed.

Since the Court was reviewing the matter following the lower court’s dismissal of the Complaint, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the Court accepted all of the factual allegations in the Complaint as true and drew all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor. Plaintiff’s disability was legal blindness, which is defined by The American Medical Association as central visual acuity of 20/200 or less in the better eye with best correction, or visual field of less than 20 degrees (normal visual field is 180 degrees). Plaintiff would therefore need to stand 20 feet from an object to see it with the same degree of clarity as a normally sighted person could from 200 feet and is able to read enlarged writing at a very close distance. Since the restaurants involved in
the lawsuit did not make large print menus available (which they are not required to do), Plaintiff asked the restaurants’ employees to read the menu items. According to the Complaint, various employees either mocked her, forced her to wait until they had served other customers or failed to read the entire menu.

In order to prevail in a claim under Title III, a plaintiff must allege: “(1) that she is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (2) that defendants own, lease, or operate a place of public accommodation; and (3) that defendants discriminated against her by denying her a full and equal opportunity to enjoy the services defendants provide.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a); Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc., 481 F.3d 724 (9th Cir. 2007); Powell v. National Bd. of Med. Examiners, 364 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2004); Stan v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 111 F. Supp.2d 119, 124 (N.D.N.Y. 2000).

The Court held that the only disputed issue was whether Plaintiff suffered discrimination under the ADA.

Defendants argued that Plaintiff was still able to eat and otherwise use the restaurants, and that the Complaint was about inadequate service rather than discrimination under the ADA. The lower court, in dismissing Plaintiff’s claims, held that the various employees “were willing and able to read her the menus.” See Camarillo, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69405, 2006 WL 2795238.

The lower court decision also stressed the position that the ADA is not the appropriate means of preventing an individual’s insensitivity to someone with a disability.

The Appellate Court stated that Plaintiff’s allegations were evidence of the fact that Defendants failed to adopt policies that would train the restaurant employees to assist disabled patrons, and they thus failed to take steps under the ADA to ensure that disabled patrons are not “excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182 (b)(2)(A)(iii).

Once the Court decided that Plaintiff suffered discrimination by Defendants’ employees’ failure to read the menus to her, a determination had to be made whether Plaintiff had standing to bring her claim under the ADA. The Court considered the three-part test utilized in Pickern v. Holiday Quality Foods Inc., 293 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2002) – - (1) past injury under the ADA; (2) reason to believe that the discriminatory practices will continue; and (3) the discriminatory practices will harm the plaintiff in the future – - and determined that Plaintiff had standing to bring this litigation.

Learning Point:

If restaurants do not provide large-print or Braille menus, they must require their employees to read their entire menu to their legally blind customers.
Failure to read the entire menu (for reasons ranging from an employee’s failure to do so to an employee’s inability to do so because of time constraints, or because the customer did not need to have the entire menu read to her) may result in a restaurant‘s liability for a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

(aMENU Note: I have to wonder how many Restaurants are really interested in tying up their Staff reading menus and how many Servers want to spend time doing so, especially when tips are part of their income.

Placing your menu on www.amenu.ca would not only solve the time consuming problem of your Staff not having to read the menu but would also help those potential customers who dont read Braille or see large print.)

Reproduced from http://www.clausen.com/index.cfm/fa/firm_pub.article/article/5530a3f6-f08b-49be-b9b1-37652e616b31/The_Fast_Food_Menu_And_A_Restaurants_Duty_To_A_Legally_Blind_Patron_Under_The_ADA.cfm

Address: 623 Mount Pleasant Rd.
Toronto, ON
M4S 2M9

Phone: (416) 544-9035

173.34.65.116

Dine with us…

You can make your reservation by:

• Online Reservation Request
• Phone: (416) 362-5411

*Please note that elevation to 360 Restaurant and the Look Out and Glass Floor Levels (separate ticket required for
Sky Pod) is complimentary with the purchase of a main entrée by each guest. 15% gratuity added to groups of 6 or more.

If you have a reservation, there is no need to stop at the ticketing counters. When you arrive at the CN Tower, you may proceed directly to the 360 Restaurant Check-in Desk located on the Mezzanine. If you need help on arrival, just look for the 360 representative by the 360 sign in the main entrance.