Chemtrusion to Pay $145,000 to Settle EEOC Class Disability Discrimination Case
Chemtrusion, Inc., a Houston-based manufacturing services company, will pay $145,000 and provide other significant relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced.
The EEOC filed suit against Chemtrusion in October 2016, claiming that since 2012, the company refused to hire or provide reasonable accommodations to a class of job applicants at the company's Jeffersonville, Ind., facility because of medical information it obtained during pre-employment medical examinations. The company failed to conduct any individualized assessment of whether they could perform essential job functions, the EEOC charged.
Such alleged conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC filed its lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division (EEOC v. Chemtrusion, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00180) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.
The EEOC and Chemtrusion voluntarily negotiated the terms of the consent decree settling the suit, without any admission of wrongdoing or liability by Chemtrusion.
In addition to monetary relief, the decree requires that Chemtrusion: (1) instruct its hiring personnel and medical providers not to conduct medical inquiries until after a conditional offer is made; (2) conduct individualized analysis before withdrawing job offers; (3) train its hiring personnel on what the ADA requires with respect to medical examinations and hiring; (4) submit decisions to rescind job offers to legal counsel for review; and (5) track rescinded offers. The EEOC will monitor compliance with the two-year decree.
"All the corrective measures required by the consent decree will ensure that Chemtrusion will comply with federal disability discrimination law in filling vacancies in the future," said Kenneth L. Bird, regional attorney for EEOC's Indianapolis District. "It will also provide a strong reminder to other employers that applicants are entitled to an individualized assessment of whether they can do a job, with or without reasonable accommodation, before a company may rescind a job offer after a medical examination."
Eliminating barriers to recruitment and hiring, especially class-based recruitment and hiring practices that discriminate against people with disabilities or racial, ethnic, and religious groups, older workers, and women, is one of the six national priorities identified by the Commission's Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP).
The rise of mental health disabilities in the workplace
Virginia Lawyers Weekly
Ten years ago, it was not entirely clear whether an employee suffering from a mental health disorder was considered to have a “disability,” as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act. In fact, there were a number of decisions from federal courts around the country during this time period holding that medically diagnosed mental conditions such as depression and bipolar disorder were not considered “disabilities” under the ADA. However, with the passage of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008—an act that Congress expressly stated should be interpreted as broadly as possible to expand coverage to employees with disabilities—many mental illnesses undoubtedly now fall within the definition.
The expansion of coverage, coupled with the rise in national attention and medical diagnoses for these mental illnesses, has led to a notable uptick in employers (and, in turn, courts) handling mental health disorder claims in the workplace. In response to this rise in mental health claims, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently issued a resource document entitled “Depression, PTSD, & Other Mental Health Conditions in the Workplace: Your Legal Rights.” Although this document provides guidance to employees facing issues related to mental health, employers can glean several takeaways from this document, as well as from recent court opinions about how to best handle mental health disorders in the workplace.
Request for Leave Not a Reasonable Accommodation for Temporary Employee
Lexology
In a decision with important ramifications for temporary staffing agencies and employers that use their services, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) did not entitle a temporary employee diagnosed with breast cancer to a leave of absence as a reasonable accommodation for her disability.
According to the opinion, defendant Kelly Services, a temporary staffing agency, hired the plaintiff, Kristin Punt, and assigned her to a customer as a receptionist working 40 hours per week. Her physical presence in the lobby/reception area during business hours was defined as an “essential function” of the position.
While on this assignment, Punt was diagnosed with breast cancer. She began missing work for medical appointments, among other reasons. Six weeks into Punt’s assignment, she emailed her manager at Kelly that she could not come to work that week, that she was concerned about the customer’s reaction to her taking time off, and that she anticipated requiring more time off for future surgery and radiation treatment. Punt, however, provided no details about the anticipated time off or the expected duration of her impairment.
Hershey Company Sued by EEOC For Disability Discrimination
The National Law Review
Global candy manufacturer The Hershey Company violated federal law when it refused to accommodate an employee with a disability and chose instead to fire her, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleged in a lawsuit filed today.
According to EEOC's suit, Hershey was aware of Kristina Williams's herniated discs and her lifting restrictions at the time of her hire in 2011 as a part-time retail sales merchandiser. Williams was diagnosed with spinal stenosis and took a short medical leave of absence in early 2015. The EEOC's investigation found that when Williams requested flexibility to divide her daily break into smaller portions to help her stay within her lifting restrictions, Hershey refused to allow her to return to work, effectively suspending her for three months. Finally, in a letter dated Aug. 19, 2015, Hershey denied her request for accommodation and instead fired her.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers must provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees who have a disability. After first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process, the EEOC filed its lawsuit (EEOC v. The Hershey Company, Civil Number 2:17-CV-01092) in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The agency seeks monetary damages on behalf of Williams, training on anti-discrimination laws, posting of notices at the worksite, and other injunctive relief.
"Employers cannot ignore a request for a reasonable accommodation from an employee with a disability," said Nancy Sienko, director of the EEOC's Seattle Field Office. "The law requires an employer to explore possible solutions to ensure that a worker can perform the essential functions of her job."
EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney John Stanley said, "Employers cannot unilaterally decide to respond to an injury by refusing to allow an employer to return to work. According to the ADA, the exploration of possible accommodations must include the input of the employee."
According to company information, The Hershey Company is based in Hershey, Pa., employs over 20,000 people in 37 different states and had over $7.38 million in net sales in 2015, the year in which Williams last worked in the company's Seattle District.
ADA compliance: Will you be the next one sued?
McKnight's Senior Living
Did you see our recent article about the lawsuit that four residents filed July 13 against Brookdale Senior Living, claiming understaffing and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Of course, this isn't the first time a senior living operator, including Brookdale, has been involved in a legal action related to accessibility issues, and most likely, it won't be the last time either.
But the three firms representing the plaintiffs in this case believe this one is the first potential ADA-related class action lawsuit against an assisted living community. And they say damages could exceed $45 million if the lawsuit is certified as a class action and the plaintiffs win.
HIV discrimination claims against Aurora settled for $60000
BizTimes.com
The U.S. Department of Justice has settled two claims that Milwaukee-based Aurora Health Care discriminated against patients with HIV in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Under the settlement agreement, Aurora will pay $30,000 to one patient, another $15,000 to the spouse of the second patient, and a $15,000 civil penalty to the federal government.
Employer to pay $1.8M for firing prescription drug user
HR Dive
- A federal district court has ordered an employer to pay $1.8 million for firing a prescription drug user after failing a drug test, Littler Mendelson reports.
- The employer's “fitness for duty” policy prohibits employees from working under the influence of drugs or alcohol and makes clear that if they are suspected of doing so, they may be subject to a drug test. After suspecting an employee with migraines of Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) abuse, it required her to submit to a drug test.
- The employee, who did not work in a safety-sensitive position, tested positive for opioids. Her doctor explained that she was receiving injections to control her migraines and that they did not impair her work, but the employer fired her anyway. Instead, it should have engaged in the Americans with Disabilities Act's interactive process of looking for a reasonable accommodation, the court said.
Fulfilling the promise of the Americans with Disabilities Act
San Francisco Chronicle
As we celebrate 27 years of ADA, we can see the significance of this law. It has challenged discrimination and helped remove many barriers so that roughly 56.7 million Americans with disabilities can lead independent lives.
But it’s important to note that the promise of ADA cannot be fulfilled unless those without disabilities act on its “clear, strong, consistent and enforceable standards.”
LaPorte County settles discrimination suit for $150000
nwitimes.com
LaPorte County has agreed to pay $150,000 to a former jail officer for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Seven years of disability discrimination complaints target UVM Medical Center
vtdigger.org
Julie Hay arrived at the emergency department of the University of Vermont Medical Center in Burlington just before midnight on July 15, 2015.
Hay, who was 50 at the time, had just experienced a heart attack. When she arrived in the emergency department, she was upset, found the environment overwhelming, and had difficulty communicating.
While Hay has a host of conditions that complicate her health care — high blood pressure, Parkinson’s disease, migraines, thyroid problems, stomach pain and schizophrenia — her biggest limitation in getting care was the fact that she was born deaf.
Within an hour of arriving in the emergency department, Hay was admitted into the UVM Medical Center, where she stayed for three days. She had not discussed the admission with an in-person interpreter, and during the whole time she was there, she spent a total of 22 minutes signing with a remote interpreter through Skype-like technology, according to findings by the Vermont Human Rights Commission.
satPRnews
The research team of the National Council on Disability (NCD) – a U.S. federal agency that provides advice to the President, Congress, and other federal agencies – will release the results of a national study on the experiences of students with mental health disabilities on U.S. college campuses during a session at the national conference of the Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD).