Settlement Agreement: Bar-T Year Round Programs for Kids
Movie patron who can't see or hear wins appellate ruling in bid for tactile interpreter
ABA Journal
A federal appeals court is giving a deaf and blind man a chance to argue he was entitled to a tactile interpreter at a Cinemark theater.
The Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave Paul McGann a chance to show that providing the interpreter does not pose an undue burden for Cinemark under the Americans With Disabilities Act. The Associated Press and PennLive.com have stories; the Oct. 6 decision is here (PDF).
McGann reads American Sign Language through touch, and experiences movies by touching the hands of a sign-language interpreter who describes the film. McGann had contacted Cinemark after he missed Gone Girl at his usual theater. A Cinemark paralegal was told two tactile interpreters would be required at a cost of $50 to $65 an hour. The paralegal denied McGann’s request.
A federal judge had ruled that a tactile interpreter is a special auxiliary aid or service that is not required by the ADA. The 3rd Circuit reversed in its opinion, holding that tactile interpreters are covered.
Can Employers Ask About Prescription Drug Use?
MarineLink
It is well established that workplace safety and productivity can be compromised, not just by the use of illicit substances and alcohol, but also by the use of prescription drugs. Federal law, however, imposes limits on employer inquiries in this area both with respect to the affected job classifications and the scope of the inquiry.
Generally, an employer may not ask all employees what prescription medications they are taking because such an inquiry is not job-related and consistent with business necessity, according to Enforcement Guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC). Nor may employers ask applicants about their lawful drug use if doing so is likely to reveal information about a disability. By contrast, however, after an offer has been extended but before employment has begun, “the employer may require a medical examination and make an offer of employment conditional on the results of such examination so long as (1) all employees are subject to such inquiry; (2) information obtained is maintained on separate forms and in separate files and treated as confidential; (3) the results of the examination are ‘only used in accordance with this subchapter.’ [42 U.S.C.] § 12112(d)(3).” Connolly v. First Personal Bank, 623 F. Supp. 2d 928, 931 (N.D. III 2008).
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) protects employees against being asked whether they are taking prescription drugs or medications, or about illnesses, mental conditions, or other current or past impairments. All current employees, not just those with disabilities, are shielded to some extent by the ADA’s requirement that employers’ limit disability-related inquiries and medical examinations to those that are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” A disability-related inquiry is one that is likely to disclose information about a disability, including current or past prescription drug use or monitoring that use.
Feds sue Con Edison over pre-offer medical exams
HR Dive
Dive Brief:
- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has sued Consolidated Edison Inc., a New York utility company, alleging that it required applicants to undergo medical examinations before they had received a job offer and also requested genetic information as a condition of employment. These actions violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), the commission said in its suit.
- EEOC also has alleged that Con Edison failed to hire some applicants after their pre-employment medical exams because of actual or perceived disabilities, in violation of the ADA.
- The suit also contains other ADA allegations, including one claim that it unnecessarily transferred a worker with a disability to a less-desirable position.
Red Olive Restaurant Reaches ADA Agreement
Patch.com
The St. Clair Shores restaurant made changes to make it more accessible for people with disabilities.
Jones Lang LaSalle Americas Sued by EEOC for Disability Discrimination
The Atlanta office of a commercial real estate and investment management company headquartered in Chicago violated federal law by discriminating against a job applicant because of her disability, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed yesterday.
According to the EEOC's lawsuit, Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc. (JLL), violated federal law when it rescinded a job offer to a development and asset strategy production support analyst position in April 2016 after the applicant disclosed her diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and requested to work remotely once per week to attend medical appointments related to her disability. Prior to learning of her disability, JLL informed the applicant numerous times during its interview process that it offered flexible work arrangements and schedules. However, once it learned that the applicant suffered from PTSD and sought to work remotely one day per week as an accommodation for her disability, JLL quickly rescinded its job offer, the EEOC said. The applicant withdrew her accommodation request after being notified that the offer had been rescinded, but JLL refused to reconsider its decision.
Such alleged conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC filed suit (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:17-CV-4017-ELR-JSA) in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The federal agency seeks back pay, and compensatory and punitive damages for the applicant, as well as injunctive relief designed to prevent such discrimination in the future.
"An employer cannot refuse to hire an employee because that person has a disability or because she sought a reasonable accommodation," said Bernice Williams-Kimbrough, director of the EEOC's Atlanta District Office. "The employee here disclosed her disability, but instead of accommodating her, the employer rescinded its job offer. This is unlawful, and the EEOC is here to stand up for the victims of such practices."
Parents of students with disabilities sue state of Georgia, allege discrimination
The Telegraph
Parents of children with disabilities and advocacy groups filed a lawsuit in federal court Wednesday alleging the state of Georgia has discriminated against students placed in “unequal and separate” schools for kids with behavioral disorders and problems.
The Georgia Network for Educational and Therapeutic Support (GNETS) schools are “segregated programs,” housed in separate buildings or in separate wings of regular schools, the lawsuit says. “Thus, GNETS students are denied the opportunity to be educated in classrooms with their non-disabled peers.”
Seventh Circuit Says Extended Leave Is Not Covered Under ADA: An Interview with Joshua A. Stein
Lexology
As Mr. Stein discusses, extended long-term leave is not covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit says. An employee who had exhausted his Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave requested an additional two months off to recover from back surgery. Instead of granting the additional leave, the employer terminated his employment. The Seventh Circuit found that extending a long-term leave of absence beyond what is covered by the FMLA is not a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. This decision conflicts with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC’s) position, as well as rulings from the majority of other circuit courts.
National Survey Identifies Major Gaps in Disabled Employment Recruitment Efforts
Nonprofit Quarterly
A Kessler Foundation survey unveiled yesterday at a Capitol Hill press conference in Washington, D.C. reveals a major gulf between supervisor impressions of how well they serve the disabled community and the practices actually needed to do so.
Employers get big ADA win in Seventh Circuit
The National Law Review
On Sept. 20, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin) handed employers a major victory regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In Severson v. Heartland Woodcraft, Inc., the court ruled that a multiple-month leave of absence does not constitute a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.
Kiosk Group Renews Focus on ADA Compliance Efforts
Associations Now
With the launch of both a new committee and working group, the Kiosk Industry Group Association hopes to ensure that its members stay on the right side of the law as the use of kiosks grows.
Worried about ageism? Ask your older workers: 'How can I help?'
HR Dive
When employers are trained on Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, they’re often cautioned against making assumptions about physical or mental impairments. Instead, when an employee’s performance is slipping, they’re advised to focus solely on the problem at hand, saying something like “I’ve noticed that you’re having trouble getting your work done; what can we do to help?”