Is a Long-Term Leave of Absence a Reasonable Accommodation?
Lexology
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) provides a comprehensive mandate for the elimination of discrimination, including employment discrimination, against individuals with disabilities. Disability discrimination in employment is commonly thought to refer to an employer’s decision to terminate an employee because of his or her disability, or a refusal to hire or promote an individual because of a disability. But unlawful disability discrimination in employment can take other forms, such as failing or refusing to provide a reasonable accommodation to a qualified individual with a disability.
On the surface, providing a reasonable accommodation to a qualified individual with a disability seems like a straightforward concept. However, the ADA does not set forth a bright line rule delineating who is considered a “qualified individual.” Instead, it states only that a “qualified individual” is someone who “with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions” of the job the individual holds or has applied for. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8). Nor does the ADA clearly define what constitutes a reasonable accommodation. Although the ambiguity around these concepts better ensures that courts analyze failure to accommodate claims on a case-by-case basis instead of imposing narrow categorical rules, the lack of clear definitions in this context has led to disagreement among courts as to who is properly deemed a “qualified individual” and what constitutes a “reasonable accommodation.”
Among the more hotly contested reasonable accommodation debates is whether a temporary leave of absence constitutes a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. Even though the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has long stated that a leave of absence can constitute a reasonable accommodation in certain circumstances, many courts have disagreed.
Delta Airlines to require doctor notes for service dogs, support pets
Central Florida News 13
Delta Airlines says it will soon require additional documentation for passengers flying with service animals.
- Delta Airlines to change service animal policies starting March 1
- Passengers will have to get forms filled out by a doctor
- Passengers would also have to sign a promissory note
- JUMP TO: Service animals FAQ ▼
Federal law requires airlines to allow people with trained service and support animals to fly free of charge, although airlines do charge a fee to allow regular pets on board.
Delta says it is seeing a growing number of people posing their pets as service animals when they are really not.
“Delta has seen an 84 percent increase in reported animal incidents since 2016, including urination/defecation, biting, and even a widely reported attack by a 70-pound dog,” Delta said in a statement.
The airline says they have seen passengers try to fly with comfort turkeys, sugar gliders and snakes.
“Ignoring the true intent of existing rules governing the transport of service and support animals can be a disservice to customers who have real and documented needs,” Delta said in a statement.
Starting March 1, Delta Airlines will require additional documentation for service animals. This includes signed forms from a doctor verifying a service animal is authentic, and a requirement that passengers sign a promissory note stating their animal will behave.
EEOC Settles with One Manufacturer, Sues Another for Discrimination
IndustryWeek
Volvo Group North America has settled a federal lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for disability discrimination, the agency reported.
The manufacturer will pay $70,000 plus provide other equitable relief to remedy conduct that violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the EEOC said.
According to the federal agency, Volvo made a conditional offer to a qualified applicant who also was a recovering addict in a supervised medication-assisted treatment program. The applicant reported during a post offer physical examination that he was taking medically prescribed suboxone.
The EEOC said Volvo failed to conduct an individualized assessment to determine what effect, if any, the suboxone would have on the applicant's ability to perform his job. When he reported to his first day of work as a laborer, the applicant was told he would not be hired due to his suboxone use.
In addition to the monetary relief, a three-year consent decree enjoins the manufacturer from future
ADA violations. Volvo will also distribute to all employees at its Hagerstown, Md., facility (where the applicant sought employment) an ADA policy, amend its policy on post-offer medical and drug evaluations, provide ADA training, report to the EEOC how it handles any disability discrimination complaints, and post a notice of the settlement.
Volvo Group North America has settled a federal lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for disability discrimination, the agency reported.
The manufacturer will pay $70,000 plus provide other equitable relief to remedy conduct that violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the EEOC said.
According to the federal agency, Volvo made a conditional offer to a qualified applicant who also was a recovering addict in a supervised medication-assisted treatment program. The applicant reported during a post offer physical examination that he was taking medically prescribed suboxone.
The EEOC said Volvo failed to conduct an individualized assessment to determine what effect, if any, the suboxone would have on the applicant's ability to perform his job. When he reported to his first day of work as a laborer, the applicant was told he would not be hired due to his suboxone use.
In addition to the monetary relief, a three-year consent decree enjoins the manufacturer from future
ADA violations. Volvo will also distribute to all employees at its Hagerstown, Md., facility (where the applicant sought employment) an ADA policy, amend its policy on post-offer medical and drug evaluations, provide ADA training, report to the EEOC how it handles any disability discrimination complaints, and post a notice of the settlement.
In a separate case, the EEOC has sued Wauseon, Ohio, knife manufacturer Busse Combat Knife Co. for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the agency, a CNC machine operator left work in 2016 after suffering an anxiety attack. After learning that the employee suffered from generalized anxiety disorder, the knife manufacturer asked why the disorder was not disclosed at hire and asked the worker to provide a medical note clearing him for work. Despite providing the requested note, Busse Combat Knife fired the worker because of the disability, in violation of the ADA, the agency claims.
The EEOC filed the suit after first seeking a voluntary pre-litigation settlement, it said.
Access Board Issues Correction to ICT Refresh Final Rule
The Access Board has issued a correction to its updated accessibility requirements for information and communication technology (ICT) to restore provisions on TTY access that were inadvertently omitted. The action applies to the final rule the Board published last January to jointly refresh its Rehabilitation Act (Section 508) standards for ICT in the federal sector and its Communications Act (Section 255) guidelines for telecommunications equipment.
The original Section 508 standards and Section 255 guidelines required that devices with two-way voice communication support use of TTY devices which provide text communication across phone connections for persons with hearing or speech impairments. In its ICT refresh, the Board had proposed replacing this provision with a requirement for real-time text (RTT) functionality, a new technology with significant advantages over TTYs. RTT transmits text in virtual real-time as each character is typed, whereas TTY messages can only be sent individually in sequence. Also, RRT technology is directly compatible with wireless and Internet protocol (IP) based networks.
In finalizing its rule, however, the Board chose to reserve the RTT requirement because the Federal Communications Commission had initiated its own rulemaking to address RTT functionality over TTY compatibility in IP-based telecommunication environments. In doing so, the Board intended to add the original TTY provision back into the rule, but the necessary language was unintentionally left out. The recent correction restores the TTY requirement with minor editorial changes for consistency with the new format and terminology of the updated requirements (Section 412.8). It also corrects a couple typographical errors in other sections of the rule. The corrections become effective March 23, 2018 without further action unless adverse comments are received within 30 days.
For further information, contact Timothy Creagan at (202) 272-0016 (v), (202) 272-0074 (TTY) or Bruce Bailey at (202) 272-0024 (v), (202) 272-0070 (TTY); email: 508@access-board.gov.