Dismissal of fired Dollar General manager’s ADA claim upheld
A Dollar General district manager who was fired after he returned from medical leave for cancer treatment could not prevail on his claim that his termination violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Wednesday.
Carl Castetter sued his ex-employer after he was fired as a district manager in Fort Wayne. He had responsibility for dollar stores and their employees, including training, hiring, firing, filing proper paperwork, conducting background checks and ensuring compliance with company standards and policies, among other things.
Castetter claimed he was mocked and demeaned by his superiors after he returned. He cited as an example a regional manager whom he claims made him get on his hands and knees to straighten a product and made unprofessional comments such as “I am going to sit here in a lounge chair and watch you work until you drop,” and “I know three people who had what you had, and they all died.”
But the company had issues with Castetter’s oversight performance, according to the record. Some employees were insufficiently trained or working without pay. The company said Castetter had failed to document and screen employees, stores were understaffed, understocked and had high employee turnover, and there was a cash discrepancy, among other deficiencies. Dollar General ultimately fired Castetter after he had been put on an improvement plan that established benchmarks that were not met.
Northern District of Indiana Chief Judge Theresa Springmann granted Dollar General’s motion for summary judgment on Castetter’s ADA claim, and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in Carl Castetter v. Dolgencorp, LLC, 19-2026,
The panel noted Castetter failed to meet the requisite showing of discriminatory intent under Geier v. Medtronic, Inc., 99 F.3d 238, 242 (7th Cir.1996), by demonstrating a causal nexus between the unprofessional remarks and the termination decision.
“At the time of his termination, Dollar General did not believe Castetter was performing his role as a District Manager adequately. Castetter has not provided evidence that Dollar General’s reason for termination is pretextual,” Senior Judge William Bauer wrote for the panel. “… The district court correctly determined the honesty of Dollar General’s beliefs and its reason for firing Castetter was not pretextual.
“Finally, Castetter does not cite any evidence that would allow for a reasonable inference that his employer did not have honest concerns about his professionalism and work ethic. Taken as a whole, Castetter’s claims are insufficient to meet the level of proof that Castetter’s disability was the ‘but for’ cause of his termination,” the panel concluded.
Compliance Issues for Managing a Virtual Workforce
As the world around us quickly changes in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, so does the work environment for most Americans. Many offices and work sites are increasingly uninhabited as a result of “stay at home” orders such as those issued in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Washington and West Virginia; orders directing all nonessential businesses to close such as those issued in Maryland, Nevada, Kentucky and Virginia; Georgia’s order requiring “medical fragile” employees to shelter in place; Kansas’ mandatory quarantine for its residents who recently traveled to certain identified states; and similar measures taken by local governments. As a result, many employees are now working from home.
This article describes key employment laws and measures that employers need to consider while their employees are working from home.
EEOC: Manufacturer violated ADA in firing worker returning from hospitalization
Dive Brief:
- The U.S. Equal Employment Commission (EEOC) has sued Interconnect Cable Technology, alleging it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it demoted and fired a long-time employee after her hospitalization for mental illness.
- The employee was promoted and held several positions during her 20 years with the electronics manufacturer but shortly after her hospitalization for a "major depressive disorder," the company's chief financial officer "immediately stripped the employee of her job duties," EEOC claimed. The CFO then allegedly demoted her and cut her pay. The company ultimately fired her, EEOC said in a March 20 statement.
- The Commission has asked for back pay, damages and training for the company's managers and supervisors.
Dive Insight:
The ADA is clear that employers generally need to accommodate workers with disabilities. The law requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations for employees and job applicants with disabilities unless the employer would suffer an undue hardship as a result. Undue hardship means that, taking into account the employer's size, financial resources, and the needs of the business, the accommodation would be "too difficult or too expensive to provide," EEOC has said in guidance.
Once an employee has requested an accommodation, experts recommend employers engage in an interactive process to identify possible solutions. Because the ADA does not require that accommodation requests be in writing or that specific language be used, experts say employers should develop a system that helps managers and supervisors recognize accommodation requests.
Whenever an employee reveals a need or a problem, to ensure that requests for ADA accommodation start off on a good legal footing, sources previously told HR Dive that HR may want to train supervisors to ask: "How can I help you?" After that, managers should communicate with the employee to determine a reasonable accommodation, documenting each step and communication along the way.
Once an accommodation has been put into place, supervisors should follow up to make sure the accommodation is working well. If not, they need to pursue a new one, David K. Fram, the director of ADA and EEO services for the National Employment Law Institute, has said.
Accommodations can take many forms, and they don't have to be expensive or elaborate. Something as simple or inexpensive as a chair for an employee with a back problem or a nearby container of orange juice for a worker with diabetes may suffice. The EEOC clearly takes the position that modifying a workplace policy because of an employee's disability can be a reasonable accommodation, it has explained. Another reasonable accommodation may involve additional leave time beyond what is otherwise provided.
We need effective national standards for service animals
The time for public comment on proposed amendments to the Air Carrier Access Act service animal rule has ended with no promise that the amendments will remedy a bad situation.
MARTA reduces service for disabled, medically fragile riders amid bus, train cutbacks
MARTA’s service for medically fragile and disabled riders has been reduced as part of the agency’s broader service reductions as ridership dwindles. No complaints about lack of service have been reported, according to MARTA.