EEOC Holds Conversation With Society of Human Resource Management Foundation VP Tina Sung
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced today that Tina Sung from the Society for Human Resource Management Foundation (SHRM) will join with EEOC Acting Chair Victoria A. Lipnic in a "fireside chat" to discuss employment and age diversity issues at the EEOC's 20th annual Examining Conflicts in Employment Laws (EXCEL) training conference in Chicago, June 27-29.
Tina Sung, SHRM Foundation board member and vice president of the Partnership for Public Service, and EEOC Acting Chair Victoria A. Lipnic will discuss the aging of the workforce and the importance of including age in diversity and inclusion programs.
Disability Services Threatened Under Proposed Cuts To Medicaid
Disability Scoop
Funding for community-based services and other supports for people with developmental disabilities would be in jeopardy under a U.S. Senate proposal to radically alter Medicaid.
After weeks of secret discussions, Senate Republicans unveiled their plan to overhaul the nation’s health care system on Thursday and it calls for severe cuts to Medicaid much like the version passed by the House of Representatives in May.
Traditionally, Medicaid has operated as an entitlement with the federal government providing matching grants to states to cover the cost of caring for those who are eligible, no matter how expensive.
For people with disabilities, Medicaid pays for everything from traditional health services like doctor and hospital visits to personal care attendants, employment and behavior supports, assistive technology and other offerings that allow individuals to live in the community.
JD Supra
Over the past 18 months, the number of claims being filed over website accessibility has increased dramatically.1 Although courts continue to differ as to whether websites are places of public accommodation covered by Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and if so, whether all websites are covered or whether there must be a nexus between a physical location and a website for the website to be a place of public accommodation, litigation over website accessibility continues to proliferate. In recent months, there have been two notable district court opinions in this area.
On June 15, 2017, following the first trial conducted over website accessibility under the ADA, Judge Robert Scola from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida held in Gomez v. Winn-Dixie that the company violated Title III of the ADA because its website is not accessible.
The court first noted that Winn-Dixie’s website and physical locations are “heavily integrated.” The court observed that services offered on Winn-Dixie’s website include the ability to refill prescriptions online, the ability to access digital coupons and link them to a rewards card, and the ability to find store locations. The court reasoned that it did not need to determine whether the company’s website is itself a place of public accommodation because the ADA requires not only access to a place of public accommodation, but also “full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation.” The court then found that Winn-Dixie violated the ADA because the lack of website accessibility had denied the plaintiff full and equal enjoyment of the ability to utilize the services available on the website.
Mental health concerns among physicians
Of all occupations and professions, the medical profession is at the top of the list of occupations with the highest risk of death by suicide, 300 to 400 physicians a year. Although many physicians are practicing what they preach as far as healthy habits, such as quitting smoking, exercising regularly, and eating healthier, they remain reluctant to address depression, a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in this group.
Most state medical boards require that physicians disclose mental health problems on their physician licensing applications. In fact, many medical boards ask more questions about mental health issues than physical conditions.
Katherine J. Gold, M.D., M.S.W., M.S., assistant professor in the University of Michigan's Department of Family Medicine, examined how state medical licensing boards in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., evaluated mental illnesses compared to physical illnesses or substance abuse on state licensing forms.
States more often asked if physicians had been diagnosed, treated, or hospitalized for mental health or substance abuse versus physical health disorders. Gold found that many such questions violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.