Total Articles: 19
The changing definition of a covered disability
Recently, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in El Paso denied an employer's motion for summary judgment on the issue of whether a plaintiff was disabled under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. (The TCHRA was amended effective Sept. 1, 2009, to reflect amendments Congress made to the ADA.
The ADA Amendments Act of 2008: Practical Implications for Employers in 2012 and Beyond"
Employment and labor law attorney Molly Hughes Cherry co-authored an article for the Defense Counsel Journal, a publication of the International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC).
Company's "100% healed" policy does not create per se disability discrimination.
In a case that adds to a split among federal appellate courts, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a company’s insistence on an employee being “100% healed” after a medical leave does not necessarily support the employee’s legal claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Powers v. USF Holland, Inc., 7th Cir., No. 10-2363, December 15, 2011.
EEOC Takes Aggressive Measures to Enforce the ADAAA
Phelps Dunbar has been advising our clients over the last year to expect an increase in EEOC charges and litigation following the passage of the Amendments to the Americans with Disabilities Act. Since the EEOC's final regulation under the Act were published in March of last year we have seen a sharp increase in EEOC charges filed under the ADA. Many of those charges have now worked their way through the EEOC process and we are seeing an increase in litigation that the EEOC is pursuing on behalf of employees who allege that they have been denied a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.
ADA Cases Are No Longer Unwelcome in Plaintiff Counsel's Offices
Lynne Seabrook was working as an assistant registrar for Upper Iowa University focusing on its Malaysia campus when she was terminated in February 2009. She felt that the termination was because she had been diagnosed with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety.
EEOC ISSUES FINAL ADAAA REGULATIONS (pdf)
The wait is over. Following its consideration of over 600 written comments and four “town hall listening sessions,” the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its final regulations March 25, 2011, implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA). The regulations took effect May 24, 2011, and provide further insight into how claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will be addressed by the EEOC and the courts.
Court issues first Texas ruling on the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 and EEOC final regulations and guidance
On May 13 in Norton v. Assisted Living Concepts Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Sherman became the first court in Texas to interpret the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 and the EEOC final regulations and guidance that becomes effective May 24. The court's opinion denying the employer's motion for summary judgment on the disability claim is instructive. The court sketched it out: An employee was diagnosed with a cancerous tumor on his left kidney in April 2009. He took off for surgery, returned to work on July 1, 2009, and was fired on August 5, 2009. He sued for disability discrimination.
The ADAAA, the ADA, and the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act
A few weeks ago, I posted my thoughts about how the expanded definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act will affect administration of the Family and Medical Leave Act. I promised to follow up with a post about the impact of the ADAAA on the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act "unless more pressing news intervene[d]."
ADA amendments means suits that would have been dismissed will get to a jury.
The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) is working its way through the courts. Things do not look good for employers. Suits once tossed as a matter of course now will get to a jury.
Comprehensive Summary of the Final Regulations to the ADA Amendments Act
On March 25, 2011, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published final regulations implementing the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA), a statute that now greatly expands the number of employees and applicants who will be considered “disabled.” The final regulations fundamentally change the manner in which an employer must treat and manage employees with medical conditions in the workplace, since it now will be much easier for individuals to establish that they are disabled. This Comprehensive Summary provides an overview of some of the key provisions in the final ADAAA regulations to help employers better understand the key changes in the law and adopt strategies to minimize liability.
New ADAAA regs: the untold story!!!
As most people in the Human Resources and employment-law worlds are aware, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently issued its final rule interpreting the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act.
Court Interprets ADAAA, Says Cancer in Remission is a Disability.
Supporting predictions that the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) would make it more difficult for employers to win ADA cases at the summary judgment stage, a district court in Indiana has ruled that cancer in remission constitutes a disability under the law regardless of whether it currently limits a major life activity
Third Circuit: Side effects of medical treatment may constitute ADA impairment (pdf).
The Third Circuit recently ruled that side effects from a medical treatment
may, by themselves, constitute an impairment under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). Although the court didn't find in favor of the
employee, it sent a clear message that under limited circumstances, an
employee may have an ADA claim if he can prove that the effects of
medical treatment are truly disabling, even if the underlying condition
isn't.
Third Cir. Rules that Side Effects from Treatment May Be an ADA Impairment.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that side effects from medical treatment may constitute an impairment under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the ADA). The 3d Circuit's decision in Sulima v. Tobyhanna Army Depot is clear that, under limited circumstances an employee-plaintiff may have a cause of action under the ADA if he can prove that the effects of medical treatment are truly disabling, even if the underlying condition is not.
Impairment caused by medication's side effects may be a disability, even if underlying condition is not.
The 3d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled, consistently with the Seventh, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits, that the side effects of medication may render an individual disabled for purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act, even though the underlying condition for which the medication was prescribed does not
Disabled employees must provide corroborating evidence of non-obvious, medically necessary accommodations.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers and employees are required to engage in an interactive process with respect to a disabled employees 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 employers 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 doctors note or statement. Recently, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower courts dismissal of a case, and found that a school failed to engage in the required interactive process after a teacher provided a doctors statement that linked the teachers Seasonal Affective Disorder depression to the lack of windows in her classroom.
Disability Law Update Employers ADA Analysis Too Restrictive, Says Ninth Circuit.
Employers struggle with the definition of disability under the federal ADA. Most people in the HR field know that an ADA disability is a physical or mental condition that substantially limits a major life activity, but this definition is of little use when it comes to determining whether a particular employee is disabled.
ADAAA Legislative History Provides Possible Clue to New "Disability" Definition.
One definition of the term "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity." The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) retains the same wording of that definition, but makes clear that the courts' and the EEOC's interpretations of the term "substantially limited" as requiring that an individual prove that he or she is "significantly restricted" in a major life activity, or words to that effect, impose too high of a standard for proving that an individual is disabled. Unfortunately, the ADAAA does not set forth a new standard, but instead requires the EEOC to issue new regulations doing so. With the January 1, 2009 effective date of the statute rapidly approaching, employers are understandably anxious for guidance on the issue.
Judicial Trends in ADA Enforcement.
Chapter 3 from "Sharing the Dream: Is the ADA Accommodating All?", which includes a discussion of Supreme Court cases that address who qualifies for coverage under the ADA.
