ADA in the News: January 21, 2015

MTA sued by riders with disabilities over paratransit access, reliability

Baltimore Sun

A class-action lawsuit has been filed against the Maryland Transit Administration on behalf of thousands of riders with disabilities, alleging the agency's federally mandated paratransit service is woefully unreliable and inaccessible.

Users with serious illnesses and other physical and mental disabilities are routinely picked up and dropped off late for critical medical appointments by MTA's Mobility/Paratransit Service, the lawsuit says. They are often put on hold for long periods of time when trying to make service appointments by phone and some have been denied service or had their access revoked with little explanation, the lawsuit says.

Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disabilities must be accommodated with paratransit options if their disabilities prevent them from using other mass transit options.

Disability discrimination: Did 'good deeds' come back to punish employer?

HR.BLR.com

Employers often feel as if they have no choice when it comes to accommodating an employee's disability. A recent decision by the 11th Circuit—which covers Alabama, Florida, and Georgia—however, reaffirms the notion that there are "outer bounds" of an employer's duty to accommodate. Not all accommodations are reasonable accommodations.

Delayed reinstatement, HR’s mockery support vet tech’s ADA, FMLA claims (CCH Netnews)
An animal autopsy technician, who alleged that her employer delayed in reinstating her and providing her with certain accommodations after three surgeries and who was given a negative evaluation at the instruction of HR employees who mocked her disability, may proceed with her ADA discrimination claims, a federal district court in Connecticut ruled. She could also proceed with a claim based on required retraining after her return, as well as an FMLA interference claim based on one of the reinstatement delays. The employer’s motion for summary judgment was denied in part (Lewis v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, DConn, January 7, 2015, Arterton, J.).

‘I’m scared’ and ‘wanna kill someone’ not necessarily threat of violence (CCH Netnews)
Disability discrimination claims by an employee who was fired after sending his supervisor a note stating he was scared, wanted to kill someone, and she should call the police, survived an employer’s motion to dismiss because, as noted by a federal district court in Pennsylvania, he had no history of violence and his instinct during the mental health crisis was to seek help and protect others. It was significant that three weeks passed before his termination, during which time he repeatedly gave notice of his disability and sought treatment, suggesting that any threat of violence had passed before he was fired. Also, while the court was mindful of an employer’s duty to provide a safe work environment, it pointed out that “termination of an employee is hardly a guarantee of safety” (Walton v Spherion Staffing, LLC, EDPa, January 13, 2015, McHugh, G.).

Transgender Woman Challenges Constitutionality of ADA Exclusion

The Legal Intelligencer

In the summer of 1989, U.S. senators debating the Americans with Disabilities Act excluded behavior they deemed immoral from the ADA's protections, including "transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments, or other sexual behavior disorders," according to the text of the law.

That portion of the ADA hasn't been challenged until now.

Kate Lynn Blatt, a transgender woman who was fired from her job at Cabela's, filed a discrimination suit last summer making claims under both the ADA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which is more often used in cases like this one.

Blatt, in a suit she filed against her employer, said she was forced to use the men's bathroom at work, and that her colleagues called her "ladyboy," "fag," "freak" and "sinner."

She and her lawyers filed a brief this week detailing a head-on challenge to the constitutionality of the ADA's exclusion of transgender people.

Take 5: views you can use: key issues facing places of public at the 25th anniversary of the ADA

Lexology

With all of the presents, decorations, and champagne now firmly in the rearview mirror, January is a time customarily spent reflecting on the year that was and planning for the year ahead. For places of public accommodation, governed by Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”)—including, among other facilities, retail stores, restaurants/bars, places of lodging, stadiums and arenas, academic institutions, and hospitals and other health care facilities—this exercise is of particular importance.

Accommodations for Pregnant Employees Reaches Supreme Court

JD Supra (press release)

What accommodations must employers provide to pregnant employees? On December 3, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a case, Young v. United Parcel Service, that may help clarify the answer to this question. The plaintiff in the case is Peggy Young, a former UPS delivery driver who became pregnant while still employed by UPS. Ms. Young’s midwife recommended that she not lift more than twenty pounds during her pregnancy. UPS has a policy of only providing accommodations for delivery drivers who: (1) have suffered on-the-job injuries; (2) are disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act; or (3) have lost their Department of Transportation certification. Because Ms. Young did not fall into one of those three categories, UPS refused to place Ms. Young on light-duty work. Ms. Young took an extended leave of absence and returned to work two months after she gave birth.

Association Discrimination: The ADA Does Not Just Protect Disabled People

PayScale Career News (blog)

Typically, when people think of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), they think of two parts of it: the part that protects disabled people from workplace discrimination and the part that requires buildings to take steps to be accessible to disabled people. What most people do not realize is that there is also a very important portion of the law that protects those who are in some way associated with a disabled person from being discriminated against at work because of that association.

Attorney Couple Defends ADA Lawsuits as Civil Rights Push

San Jose Inside (blog)

In the 25 years since ADA became law of the land, millions of dollars have gone to settlements, a phenomenon widely reported and intensely debated. People with disabilities simply want access to shops and restaurants, while companies hit with lawsuits—almost always by serial litigants demanding hefty sums of cash—call it a legalized shakedown. But a large number of small businesses have not complied, remaining open targets for what they call “drive-by litigation.”

Limited job opportunities for people with disabilities a challenge for OVR

Marianas Variety

EMPLOYING more people with disabilities is among the challenges that the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation is facing, according to OVR’s fiscal year 2015 CNMI State Plan.

Feedback Form