<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Disability Discrimination Articles</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/fedindex/5</link>
<description>Disability discrimination articles covering the topics under the Americans With Disabilities ACT (ADA)</description>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:11:54 EST</lastBuildDate>
<language>en-us</language>


<item>
<title>Proposed Regulations Under ADAAA.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8681</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8681</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) was enacted on September 25, 2008, and became effective on January 1, 2009. This law made a number of significant changes to the definition of &quot;disability.&quot; Congress directed the EEOC to amend its ADA regulation to reflect the changes made by the ADAAA. The EEOC approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which was published in the Federal Register on September 23, 2009.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment Period Open for Proposed Regs to the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8657</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8657</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>The U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
(“EEOC”) and the U.S.
Department of Justice (“DOJ”)
will be hosting a town hall
meeting in Chicago to invite
comments on the proposed
regulations to the ADA
Amendments Act of 2008 found
at www.eeoc.gov. The
agencies are encouraging input
on the regulations from the
perspectives of both the
business and disability
advocacy communities.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Employer's Return-to-Work Evaluation Found Unlawful "Medical Exam" under ADA, Ninth Circuit Rules.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8644</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8644</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>Relying heavily on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement guidance, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has held that a physical capacity examination administered to an employee who had been on a medical leave of absence was an impermissible “medical examination” under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Indergard v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. 08-35278 (9th Cir. Sept. 28, 2009).  The Court reversed summary judgment in favor of the employer.  The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Termination of Teacher After Her Complaints on Behalf of Disabled Students Can Support May Constitute ADA Retaliation.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8623</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8623</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a teacher’s statements on behalf of disabled students were “protected activity” under the ADA, and that the teacher had standing to sue for retaliation under the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Disabled employees must provide corroborating evidence of non-obvious, medically necessary accommodations. </title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8581</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8581</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers and employees are required to engage in an interactive process with respect to a disabled employee’s request for a reasonable accommodation. In cases of psychological disability - depression, for example - necessary accommodations may be non-obvious to the employer. In those cases, courts have held that in order to trigger an employer’s obligation to provide accommodation, a disabled employee must make the employer aware of any non-obvious, medically necessary accommodations by supplying corroborating evidence, such as a doctor’s note or statement. Recently, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a case, and found that a school failed to engage in the required interactive process after a teacher provided a doctor’s statement that linked the teacher’s Seasonal Affective Disorder depression to the lack of windows in her classroom.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>The ADA at Nineteen: Footloose and Fancy Free.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8573</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8573</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>Since its passage in 1990, no other federal employment law has engendered more celebration or controversy than the Americans With Disabilities Act. Like the unruly teenager it is, you can't turn your back on the ADA for a moment without the Act reasserting itself. This past month was no exception.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>EEOC’S PROPOSED ADAAA REGULATIONS.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8568</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8568</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>The Americans With Disabilities Act’s (“ADA”) employment provisions became operative in 1992. Since then, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has issued hundreds of pages of regulations, technical assistance, and whitepapers. The courts have issued countless opinions interpreting the act. And employers, consultants, and doctors have implemented policies and protocols for dealing with applicants’ and employees’ requests for reasonable accommodation.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Third Circuit Provides Guidance on Thorny FMLA and ADA Issues.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8532</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8532</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit’s recent decision in Erdman v. Nationwide Insurance Co.1 No. 07-3796 (Sept. 23, 2009) provides much-needed guidance to employers on several Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) issues including : (1) how to analyze FMLA hours eligibility when the employee claims off-the-clock work, (2) what is considered a protected activity for purposes of an FMLA retaliation claim, and (3) how the ADA applies to employees who request leave to care for a disabled family member.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Employer May Not Count Disability-Induced Absences against Employee, Federal Court Rules.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8503</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8503</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>Managing workers with chronic conditions who require intermittent leave is difficult, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon has reminded us. The Court has denied an employer’s motion for summary judgment on an employee’s claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Oregon Family Leave Act.  It has held that the employee, who suffered from narcolepsy, had raised sufficient issues of fact for trial regarding, among other things, whether she was substantially limited in the major life activity of sleeping and whether the reason for her discharge – excessive absences – was pretextual.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>EEOC Issues Proposed Regulations on the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.</title>
<link>http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=8501</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">Article: 8501</guid>
<author>elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network)</author>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<description>On September 23, 2009, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued lengthy, proposed regulations concerning the recent amendments to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADAAA), which substantially expanded the definition of disability and the corresponding reach of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC estimates that an additional one million workers may now meet the revised definition of disability. Interested parties have on or until November 23, 2009, to submit comments to the proposed regulations. This advisory will highlight just a few of the changes in the proposed regulations.</description>
</item>
</channel>

</rss>

