ADA: Minnesota court finds time is not on employer's side in disability claim
HR.BLR.com
U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery recently denied an employer's motion for summary judgment (i.e., a request for dismissal without a trial) on a former employee's disability discrimination and retaliation claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). The employee raised a genuine issue of material fact based primarily on the timing of his request for accommodation, which was made the same day as his employer's decision to terminate him.
25 MSAs Where the Disabled Are Most Able to Afford a New Home
Builder Magazine
This month marks 26 years of the ground-breaking Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) taking effect. That legislation's mandates in employment, transportation, public accommodation, and communication didn't just make it easier for people with disabilities to receive an education and get a job. It also has created an ever-growing group of people with disabilities--combined with the ever-aging cohort of baby boomers--who will want to live in homes that provide assistance to overcome their own limitations.
The ADA not only has an impact on people it was set out to help, but also brings huge changes across the board. Builders, architects, and other professionals in many, if not all, fields of the construction world have been more or less influenced by this act. What we have now taken for granted-- including those tactile warning systems on sidewalks, wheelchair-friendly ramps at an entrance, and larger accessible-restrooms in almost every public building--never existed before the ADA. And these days, builders are starting to adopt new concepts such as universal design and are building more with accessibility in mind.
Medical Leave as a Reasonable Accommodation under the ADA: How Far Must an Employer Go?
JD Supra
On May 9, 2016, the EEOC released further guidance on the provision of medical leave as a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. While the guidance reiterates the Commission's previous position that employers must consider unpaid leave as a potential accommodation, it stops short of providing concrete parameters for employers to operate within. When is a request for additional leave unreasonably long? When would it pose an undue hardship? Questions like those were left open by the EEOC to be determined on a case-by-case basis. The guidance did make clear, however, that this issue is high on the EEOC's priority list, and clearly, the Commission believes that medical leave beyond the FMLA, and beyond an employer's leave policies, are mandatory considerations during the good faith interactive process. Whether additional leave must be granted as a reasonable accommodation, of course, depends on the circumstances.
Hoping to provide employers with a little more clarity, I conducted a recent survey of cases – mostly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and the district courts of Tennessee – to see where various judges have drawn the line between medical leave that is, and is not, a reasonable accommodation. Along the way, three trends emerged – each of which will help employers draw reliable boundaries for themselves on this issue.
Consent decrees keep EEOC eyes on employers long after settlements
Business Insurance
Employers should be aware that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has and will likely continue to utilize consent decrees to force them to properly accommodate disabled employees.
In May, the commission reached an $8.6 million settlement with Mooresville, North Carolina-based Lowe’s Cos. to resolve claims the retailer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by terminating employees whose medical leaves of absence exceeded the company’s 180- or 240-day maximum leave policy.
But a less-discussed aspect was the four-year consent decree that requires Lowe’s to retain a consultant with ADA experience to review and revise company policies as appropriate, implement effective ADA training for both supervisors and staff, and develop a centralized tracking system for employee requests for accommodation, among other requirements.
EEOC, Guardsmark settle allegations of ADA, GINA violations
Legal News Line
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has announced that Guardsmark, a major security company in North America, will pay $329,640 to settle allegations of disability and genetic information discrimination. The settlement impacts more than 1,100 job applicants.
Guardsmark purportedly required all job applicants to disclose disabilities and family medical history, which is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination ACT (GINA). Pre-employment inquiries are prohibited under the ADA and GINA.
Guardsmark did not admit liability, but agreed to a two-year conciliation with EEOC and the alleged victims. In addition to monetary relief, Guardsmark will remove prohibited medical inquiries from the application process. EEOC will monitor compliance with the agreement throughout the two years.
"Guardsmark has been cooperative in working with EEOC to resolve this charge without having to resort to litigation," said Katharine W. Kores, district director for EEOC's Memphis District, which includes Little Rock in its jurisdiction. "We commend Guardsmark's willingness to reassess and change their application process so that applicants and employees do not have to divulge such private personal medical information. We hope employers take note of this agreement, because EEOC will continue to actively pursue and enforce ADA and GINA."
NDOC Responds to Justice Department Regarding HIV Findings
KTVN
The Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) has responded to the United States Department of Justice (US DOJ) letter dated June 20, 2016 wherein their review found the NDOC had “violated Title II of the ADA by discriminating against inmates with disabilities” with a focus on HIV positive inmates. The NDOC has and is continuing to review and revise policies, procedures and practices regarding inmates diagnosed with HIV to reach compliance with the US DOJ’s remedial recommendations.
Survey finds Fauquier polling places violate ADA
Fauquier Now
Nearly half of Fauquier’s 21 polling places violate the American with Disabilities Act, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
But, to hear Fauquier Registrar Alex Ables tell it, most of the infractions affecting 10 polling places seem minor and would interfere with nobody’s ability to vote on Nov. 8.