Another fun roller coaster of bureaucracy.
I told the supervisor about the driver hiding the restraint from me and that I was no longer comfortable with her driving my son. He said he would look into it.
When he returned to me, he said that the driver claimed the school had been insisting on using the restraint. I had already spoken with the school, who said that the driver had requested it. Personally, I believe the school. The driver's story simply makes no sense. If the school was insisting on a restraint, they'd insist on it happening for both the morning and afternoon ride.
Even if the driver was telling the truth, why didn't she seek clarification from me, the school or the company, knowing that this was an issue of contention? It all just stinks of bullshit. Those who deliberately break the rules always have excuses ready in case they get caught.
The supervisor pushed me to give the driver another chance and I said I'd think about it. After a day and a night, I knew I couldn't. The restraint was something I could see, something concrete that's either off or on, there's no ambiguity. Who knows what else would be going on that I couldn't see or couldn't prove?
My mother is considering launching a campaign against the transport companies. We've had more than our fair share of drivers who are clearly unsuited to be transporting special needs children. Whatever the criteria being used, the standards aren't high enough. If she does, then I predict a complete system overhaul within five years.
For now, we'll be picking up Alex at the end of the day until another driver can be arranged. I'm hoping the rest of the process goes smoothly. I could see how it would be quite easy for the company to leave this in my hands and not be in a hurry to arrange something different. The supervisor assured me it will be relatively quick, but (as those reading this know), I don't put much stock in promises, only in results.