Total Articles: 17
Virginia Federal Court Finds Hospital Not Required to Accommodate ER Nurse’s Lifting Restrictions
A Virginia district court has held, once again, that a hospital does not have to accommodate a nurse whose disability causes lifting restrictions so extensive that, in effect, she cannot perform the essential functions of her position.
Federal Appeals Court Holds that Employers May Be Obligated Under the ADA to Accommodate Commuting to Work
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit1 recently reiterated that employers may be obligated under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to accommodate requests by a disabled employee for assistance with her commute to work. Nixon-Tinkelman v. N.Y. City Dep't of Health & Mental Hygiene, Case No. 10-cv-3317 (2d Cir. Aug. 10, 2011). The plaintiff in Nixon-Tinkelman was hearing impaired and suffered from cancer, heart problems and asthma. Her employer, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH), reassigned her to work for nine months in Manhattan, rather than Queens, where she previously had been assigned. She requested that DOHMH assist her with her commute to Manhattan during this time. The district court granted summary judgment to DOHMH, finding that "commuting falls outside the scope of the plaintiff's job, and is thereby not within the province of an employer's obligations under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act." The Second Circuit reversed, stating that its prior decisions2 establish that "there is nothing inherently unreasonable . . . in requiring an employer to furnish an otherwise qualified disabled employee with assistance related to her ability to get to work."
EEOC Examines Use of Leave as Reasonable Accommodation
On June 8, 2011, the EEOC held a Commission Meeting where the use of leave as a reasonable accommodation was explored. During the meeting, the EEOC reiterated the importance of providing leave in certain circumstances as a reasonable accommodation. The EEOC noted that while many requests for leave can be handled under an employer's regular leave policies, some situations require making exceptions to an employer's leave policies. For instance, the EEOC specifically provided its stance on "no fault" leave policies - i.e., those policies under which an employee is automatically terminated after using a certain amount of leave - stating that such policies "must be modified as a reasonable accommodation, absent undue hardship, if an employee with a disability needs additional leave." The Commission Meeting follows a recent trend of increased EEOC challenges to employer leave policies. This trend is perhaps best demonstrated by review of recent press releases from the EEOC, which have highlighted the EEOC's role in recent litigation.
Employer Best Practices: "Leave" as a Reasonable Accommodation Under the ADA
Thanks to those who attended my webinar last week with EEOC Regional Attorney John Hendrickson on "Examining the Use of 'Leave' as a Reasonable Accommodation Under the ADA." If you missed the program, you can access the webinar and materials here. As the survey feedback indicated, it was a great opportunity to discuss issues specifically relating to leaves of absence under the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
11 Employer FAQs (No. 5): Is there any difference between light duty and reasonable accommodation?
Most of the time, yes. Light duty is usually given in the context of a workers' compensation injury. It's often "make work" and provided to facilitate recovery, and it's usually offered for a finite period of time. Most importantly, it's completely optional for the employer (although workers' comp carriers don't see it that way).
The EEOC's 5 warnings about medical leaves and the ADA
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission held a public hearing this week on leave of absence as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Ninth Circuit weighs in on assistance with commuting as a reasonable accommodation.
Earlier this year, and in a case of first impression, the 3d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an employee’s claim that her employer violated the ADA by refusing to change her work shift after she reported commuting difficulties based upon a visual impairment that made it difficult for her to drive at night. Now, in an unpublished opinion, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a similar decision. In that case, the Court reversed a decision in favor of an employer, allowing an individual’s claim to go to trial on the issue of whether the company failed to accommodate the employee’s visual impairment when it refused to modify her work schedule to daylight only hours.
Must employer accommodate employee who doesn't have ride to work? (pdf).
The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears appeals from
federal courts in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, recently
decided an employment accommodations case under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). The case offers some key reminders about best
practices when you're dealing with an employee's request for
accommodations under the ADA.
Third Circuit says accommodation may include shift change that assists with commute to work.
In an unusual case of first impression, the 3d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that under certain circumstances, the ADA may obligate an employer to accommodate an employee’s disability-related difficulties in getting to work. In that case, the Court reversed summary judgment in favor of an employer and held that changing a part-time employee’s schedule to day shift – because her monocular vision made it dangerous for her to drive at night – could be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA
3d Cir. Finds Accommodation Required for Employee Without a Ride to Work.
Colwell v. Rite Aid Corp., is an accommodation case brought under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), recently decided by the Third Circuit, which hears appeals from the federal courts of Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. Jon Hyman, at the Ohio Employer's Law Blog, was the first to post about the Colwell opinion, noting that the decision offers employers some key reminders about best practices when dealing with an employee’s request for accommodations made pursuant to the ADA.
The Risk of Automatically Terminating Employees After Leave Expires.
The EEOC published a press release a few days ago about the distribution of a $6.2 million settlement it had reached with Sears, Roebuck & Co. The lawsuit had been filed in November 2004 in federal court in Chicago. The consent decree was entered and publicized on September 29, 2009 as the largest ADA settlement in a single case in EEOC history.
ADA’s Interactive Process May Require Plaintiff to Identify Open Position for Transfer.
As defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the term “discriminate” includes an employer’s failure to make reasonable accommodations to the limitations of a disabled employee. Reasonable accommodation may include reassignment to a vacant position within the company. The 10th U.S. Circuit court of Appeals recently held that a disabled employee could not support her failure-to-accommodate claim under the ADA, because she did not present evidence of any specific vacant positions to which she could have been transferred.
Request For an Indefinite Leave of Absence is Not a Reasonable Accommodation Under the ADA.
The 8th U.S. Circuit court of Appeals recently upheld summary judgment in favor of an employer who terminated the employment of an individual undergoing cancer treatment. Peyton v. Fred’s Stores of Arkansas, Inc., 8th Cir., No. 08-2346, April 15, 2009. In that case, the Court held that because there was no reasonable accommodation that would have allowed the individual to perform the essential functions of her job during the period in which she was absent for treatment, there was no violation of the ADA.
ALTERNATIVE POSITIONS AS A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION: WHAT IS REQUIRED?
The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) both require employers to reasonably accommodate the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified employee or applicant with a disability. However, an employer’s duty to provide reasonable accommodation under the FEHA is broader than under the ADA, even considering the recent amendments to the ADA which become effective on January 1, 2009. (We wrote about the amendments in our September 24, 2008, column.)
Job Reassignment Under ADA Remains Unclear.
While the Supreme Court stands to be quite busy in the next several months deciding important employment law questions, it will not issue a ruling in one of the more widely-anticipated cases that had appeared on its docket this term: Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
This case was to decide the correct standard to apply in ADA cases when an employee seeks a reassignment to a new position as a reasonable accommodation – should that employee merely be afforded the opportunity to compete with other applicants in the normal hiring pool, or should the employer be forced to grant preferential treatment and automatically reassign that employee above more qualified applicants?
Family Leave As An Accommodation Under The ADA.
The Tenth Circuit held that a request for a leave within the limitations of the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") may qualify as a request for a reasonable accommodation under the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA").
Accommodation Ideas.
Consultants from the Job Accommodation Network have compiled several ideas for accommodating individuals with particular disabilities, ranging from AIDS to Wheelchair Users.
