JD Supra
The Americans with Disabilities Amendment Act significantly broadened the definition of protected disabled individuals under federal antidiscrimination law. In subsequent rules implementing ADAAA, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission stated that pregnancy complications can fall under this expanded disability definition. Last month in an unpublished decision, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with this disability classification, but concluded that the plaintiff was not qualified to perform her job.
In Agee v. Mercedes-Benz U.S. Int’l, Inc., the plaintiff’s doctor restricted her to no more than 40 hours of work per week due to her pregnancy. She alleged that Mercedes failed to accommodate her under the ADA and Pregnancy Discrimination Act by refusing to waive its requirement that employees work overtime. The Eleventh Circuit agreed that the plaintiff fell under the ADA’s definition of disability, but also determined that she was not qualified to perform the essential job function of working overtime. Mercedes demonstrated that such flexibility is an integral part of its production process.
In last year’s Young decision, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that employers that offer light duty programs can only exclude pregnant employees from participation in limited circumstances. If pregnancy complications are routinely recognized as ADA disabilities, this would create accommodation obligations for employers that do not offer light duty to anyone. Such accommodations could take the form of leave, modified work schedules or even temporary transfer to other vacant positions. This decision points out the need for employers to analyze pregnancy accommodation requests under multiple laws in order to assure compliance.
The National Law Review
In a significant decision for all businesses that maintain an online presence, a California court recently ruled that a luggage retailer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and California state law by failing to make its website accessible to a blind customer. This summary judgment decision is noteworthy because in addition to holding that the retailer’s website is subject to accessibility obligations under Title III of the ADA, the court also required the retailer to take specific affirmative steps to modify its website to achieve compliance. Title III covers public accommodations including, but not limited to, retailers, restaurants, hotels, theaters and entertainment venues, medical offices, and other service establishments.
Emerging Accessibility Issues under Title III of the ADA
Lexology
Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers in a wide range of industries to ensure public accommodations, i.e. make their sites, goods and services accessible to individuals with disabilities. This impacts employers in numerous ways that have previously remained off the radar of ADA compliance but are now taking on greater focus, particularly regarding service animal access obligations and website accessibility. In this podcast, two Littler Mendelson shareholders, Peter Petesch, Esq. and Gavin Appleby, Esq., bring their subject matter expertise to bear on this fast growing area of liability exposure. Peter and Gavin discuss the challenges and responsibilities presented by the laws and regulations that have emerged – or have yet to emerge – in the area governing provision of accessibility to individuals with disabilities.
Elder care facility wins dismissal of ADA and PHRA discrimination claims
The Pennsylvania Record
A Newtown Square continuing care facility has won its motion for a partial dismissal of a plaintiff’s discrimination claims under both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA).
On Thursday, Judge Cynthia M. Rufe granted White Horse Village Inc.'s motion to dismiss the aforementioned claims made by Marlene McIntosh, who has been employed by White Horse Village as a licensed practical nurse (LPN) since 2010.
Obesity Not A Disability Without An Underlying Medical Cause
JD Supra
In June of last year, we pondered whether obesity is a mere physical characteristic or a disability protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as now amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA). In that inquiry, undertaken in the context of a pending appeal of a federal court’s dismissal of a case, we noted that organizations from the American Medical Association to the American Association of Retired Persons had weighed in on the question, generally supporting the argument that morbid obesity, in and of itself, should qualify as a disability under the ADA’s now broadened definition of “disability.”
FurnitureDealer.Net Upgrades Websites To Be Accessible to People with Disabilities
Furniture World Magazine
FurnitureDealer.Net, a provider of websites and Internet marketing services to independent home furnishing retailers, has announced that they have upgraded its website platform to make its’ clients’ websites more accessible to people with disabilities, including visual and hearing impairments. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) is a law that protects the rights of people with disabilities. Legal experts believe this law will soon be broadened to apply to business websites.
Serial ADA lawsuit filer striking Bay Area
San Jose Mercury News
In November, Sameer Misson found out his family's Valero gas station had been sued for violating disability access laws.
Surprised, the 29-year-old East Bay resident quickly made the relatively minor fixes to the handicap parking striping and signage, plus changes to the door pressure, counter height and bathroom sink to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It cost him about $300, and he paid an access specialist to certify that his San Ramon Valley Boulevard service station was up to code.
San Ramon gas station owners accused of violating ADA laws
KGO-TV
A Contra Costa County gas station owner is discovering that solving a lawsuit isn't the same as settling it.
He's been sued by a Sacramento-area lawyer with a focus on handicapped accessible businesses and buildings.
The gas station owner said he's not upset to find out he's in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. He's upset that he was willing to spend several thousand dollars to fix the problem and settle the court cost, but the plaintiff wanted more than 10 times that much.
Shops hit with ADA accessibility lawsuits likely to be targets of 'serial litigators'
Madison County Record
Earlier in the year, Margie Milovich’s neighbor had been hit with a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act. But she said it still didn’t prepare her for the moment the same plaintiff delivered a similar lawsuit to the door of LaSalle Flowers, a family-owned River North flower shop at 731 N. LaSalle, dating back to the 1930s.
Medical marijuana creates different challenges for employers
Tucson Local Media
Arizona voters legalized medical marijuana a few years ago, but employers are still adjusting to how these new laws affect how they handle their employees.
In some ways, medical marijuana use is no different than any other prescription drug. But it is still an intoxicant and even with a medical marijuana card, there are restrictions on use by workers.