Opposition to Motion to Dismiss: U.S. v. Harris County, Texas (Word) | PDF
Settlement Agreement: Arrowhead Regional Medical Center
Asleep At The Wheel: Trucking Company's Sleep Apnea Policy And Procedures Reviewed By Federal Courts
Mondaq News Alerts
Recently decided court case finds that motor vehicle carriers may lawfully require overweight drivers to submit to a medical examination testing for obstructive sleep apnea.
Court upholds dismissal of driver for refusing carrier-requested sleep study
Fleet Owner
A federal court last month ruled that a driver with a body mass index of 35 must submit to a sleep study or risk losing their job – even if they exhibit no other factors for sleep apnea.
The case, heard by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, involved Crete Carrier Corp.'s driver Robert J. Parker who was dismissed in 2013 after he refused to abide by company policy requiring all drivers with a BMI over 35 to submit to a carrier-supplied sleep study. Parker's attorney Joy Shiffermiller maintained that Crete's policy violated the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) on the basis of a perceived disability. She also said that the court cited the details of a pending FMCSA rule on sleep apnea as if it was already a regulation.
(The pending regulation would require all drivers with a BMI of 40 to submit to a sleep study as would a BMI of 33 in addition to three other factors including being a male older than 42, loud snoring, heart disease, diabetes and witnessed apnea.)
"That rule isn't even in effect. Nobody was asked to address the rule. Nobody applied it to my client. That's the first part of my objection [to the court's ruling.] The second part of my objection is that under the ADA, you're required to have an individualized inquiry before you ask someone to submit to a medical exam. You have to be able to show a business necessity under the Americans with Disabilities Act," Shiffermiller said.
LA Fitness Changes Policy That Discriminated Against People With Disabilities
The Mighty
On Wednesday, New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman announced that LA Fitness, which operates more than 300 gyms in the U.S. and Canada, must change a policy that discriminates against people with disabilities.
The attorney general’s office began investigating Fitness International, LLC, LA Fitness’s parent company, after receiving multiple complaints that people with disabilities were being forced to pay gym fees for their aides.
One of the complainants, Claudia Ciatto, said her son with a disability had to cancel his gym membership after LA Fitness employees barred him from entering the gym without paying a guest fee for the licensed nurse who was required to be with him while he exercised. “People with disabilities have the right to be treated with the same respect and consideration that any other person is given,” Ciatto said in a press release from the attorney general. “No one has the right to lessen a person’s worth. This facility clearly discriminated against my son and we couldn’t be happier that we have become part of changing its policy.”
Under Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act, places of public accommodation – like a gym and other membership-based places open to the public – are required to modify their policies to accomodate people with disabilities. By charging disabled members additional fees for their aids – who were not exercising but assisting – was discrimination.
“My office is committed to vigorously enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act, which promises all New Yorkers the opportunity to live fully and independently regardless of disability status,” Schneiderman said. “Businesses have a responsibility to make reasonable accommodations that increase accessibility for New Yorkers, and I am pleased that LA Fitness has agreed to take important steps to ensure equal access for all at their facilities.”
As part of the resolution, LA Fitness has agreed to waive membership fees for those whom require an aide to exercise. The gym will also train employees so they are familiar with the new policies as well as local and federal accessibility laws. According to the Attorney General’s office, these changes affect the 29 NewYork branches of LA Fitness.
Safeway Will Rehire Store Clerk and Pay $27,000 to Settle EEOC Disability Discrimination Lawsuit
Safeway, Inc. will pay $27,000 in monetary damages and furnish significant equitable relief, including returning an employee to work, to resolve a federal disability discrimination lawsuit.
According to the suit, Patricia Bonds worked as a food clerk at Safeway's Westminster, Md., store when she sustained a work-related injury that substantially limited her in her lifting ability. Although Safeway initially accommodated Bonds' disability by reassigning her to work at the customer service desk, the store abruptly placed her on indefinite unpaid leave, claiming that she had exhausted her time limits for modified duty. EEOC charged that Safeway refused to observe its legal duty to provide a reasonable accommodation and then unlawfully fired Bonds because of her disability.
Peanut Butter Redux: More on Food Allergies
NDTV
After a peanut-allergic letter writer (LW) asked a colleague to stop bringing peanut butter sandwiches to work, someone deliberately smeared peanut butter on the LW's desk, causing an allergic reaction. The boss dismissed the LW's complaint and said the LW shouldn't be able to dictate what co-workers eat.
Many commenters argued that employees with severe food allergies are exclusively responsible for protecting themselves at work. The Americans With Disabilities Act, however, says otherwise.
Southeast Texas Record
Texas' attorney general is pleased the U.S. Supreme Court will not hear a case after all about whether Texas must force private drivers’ license training schools to be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Eighth Circuit & the ADA, Part II: Must a Request for Accommodation be Explicit?
JD Supra
In contrast to Parker v. Crete Carrier Corporation, et al, in Kowitz v. Trinity Health, et al, No. 15-1584 (October 17, 2016), a split panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for an employer on an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claim, finding a factual dispute about whether the employer knew the employee needed an accommodation despite the absence of a formal request for accommodation.
Segregated Employment, Day Programs May Violate ADA
Disability Scoop
Just as people with disabilities have a right to live in the community, the U.S. Department of Justice is warning states that the same rights apply to employment and other activities too.
In a 13-page guidance document issued this week, the federal agency says that the integration mandate of the Americans with Disabilities Act applies broadly.
“The integration mandate of Title II of the ADA is intended to allow individuals with disabilities to live integrated lives like individuals without disabilities, including by working, earning a living and paying taxes,” the guidance states.
Disabled-access lawsuit against ODOT settled
KTVZ
In the largest commitment to an accessible transportation system in state history, the Oregon Department of Transportation, Disability Rights Oregon and the Association of Oregon Centers for Independent Living announced Thursday a proposed agreement which will make the state highway system more accessible to those with disabilities.
The agreement settles a federal lawsuit filed in February against ODOT by the Association of Oregon Centers for Independent Living (AOCIL), and eight individuals with mobility and visual impairments throughout the State of Oregon that alleged noncompliance with Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
The Weird Stereotypes Actors With Disabilities Are Forced To Confront
BuzzFeed News
Actors and filmmakers debunked some of the weird myths and preconceptions that thwart their careers during a disability inclusion summit.
Casa Delicias faces legal battle: ADA lawsuit could force closure of restaurant after 35 years
Hesperia Star
A local Mexican eatery that has served the High Desert for over three decades is in danger of closing due to allegations it is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
State Senate settles mysterious 'employment matter' for $82000
Buffalo News
The state Senate has quietly agreed to pay $82,000 to resolve an “employment matter’’ involving allegations of “discrimination and retaliation” brought by someone currently or formerly on its payroll.
State officials, though, will not say who is getting the settlement money or who was responsible for the “discrimination and retaliation.”
The settlement comes after years of allegations of hostile work environments in the Legislature, with complaints sometimes lodged against lawmakers and sometimes against other staff members.
Though state officials defended the decision not to identify the person who reached a settlement with the Senate, the case raises questions about the use of taxpayer money to settle a case without saying why the case was ended and who might be responsible for the workplace discrimination.