United States: New York City's New Requirements For Workplace Accommodations
Mondaq News Alerts
Effective October 15, 2018, employers in New York City will be subject to broader accommodation requirements than those set forth in the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). A recent amendment to the New York City Human Rights Law ("NYCHRL") requires employers to engage in a "cooperative dialogue" with an individual who is or may be entitled to an accommodation.
Working with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome & Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
ProHealth
Many people with mild cases of ME/CFS are able to continue working either full or part time. Others find that the fatigue and cognitive problems are so severe, continuing to work is impossible.
Many people with mild cases of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome & Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS) are able to continue working either full or part time. Others find that the fatigue and cognitive problems are so severe, continuing to work is impossible. When that happens, it may be necessary to apply for disability.
While working when you have ME/CFS is not easy, it does offer some important benefits if you’re able to do it. In addition to the obvious financial benefits, working can contribute to feelings of self-worth, provide opportunities for social interaction, offer intellectual challenges and even help distract your mind from your illness for periods of time as you focus on your job tasks.
In most cases, there are modifications that can be made to your job, schedule or workspace that can improve your ability to continue working and increase your productivity. According to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), most employers are obligated to make “reasonable accommodations” for people with disabilities.
The following list of possible modifications for people with ME/CFS is provided by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Job Accommodation Network. You can use this list when discussing suggested modifications with your employer.
Sen. Duckworth: 'Offensive' law would weaken landmark ADA
Curbed
The veteran and Illinois politician protests law that would roll back accessibility protections. She has spoken out against a new law making its way through Congress. H.R. 620, which passed the House earlier this month with a 225-192 vote and will move to the Senate, would roll back many of the protections enshrined in the Americans with Disabilities Act. The 1990 civil rights bill sought to guarantee equal rights for then roughly 40 million American citizens with disabilities, in part by mandating that buildings, transportation, and public accommodation provide equal access and reasonable accommodations, such as entry ramps.
A New ADA on the Horizon? The House Says Yes
Lexology
On February 15, the House in a 225 to 192 vote passed legislation to amend the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA Education and Reform Act (H.R.620) would require plaintiffs hoping to sue businesses in federal court to first deliver written notice to that business, specifically detailing the illegal barrier to access. The business would then have 60 days to develop a plan to address the complaint and outline improvements to remove the barrier. Finally, the business will have an additional 60 days to remove the barrier, or in the very least make substantial progress in doing so.
Disabled customer accuses Fresno restaurant of violating ADA
Northern California Record
A disabled California man who requires a wheelchair for mobility is suing property owners of a Fresno restaurant, alleging disability discrimination and failure to uphold Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations.
Jose Acosta, who has filed other discrimination suits, filed a complaint Feb. 16 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against Rosalinda Morales, doing business as Tacos La Piedad, and Husam Kaileh, alleging failure to provide full and safe equal access to its facilities.
According to the complaint, on Nov. 21, 2017, Acosta went to Tacos LA Piedad, 2709 N. Hughes Ave., Fresno to have a meal. The suit says Acosta suffered discrimination and difficulties due to the architectural barriers and/or lack of ADA-compliant facilities. The lawsuit states these barriers deterred him from enjoying the goods, services and accommodation offered at the restaurant.
The plaintiff alleges the defendants caused Acosta difficulty maneuvering the steep and uneven parking ramp, failed to have an accessible transaction counter and failed to alter the heavy restroom door that caused the plaintiff difficulty.
Acosta seeks trial by jury, injunctive relief, statutory minimum damages of $4,000 per offense, attorney fees, litigation expenses costs of suit, interest, and all further relief the court deems proper. He is represented by attorney Zachary M. Best of Mission Law Firm APC in San Jose.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California case number 18-cv-237
Campus responds to changes in disability laws
The Wichitan
As a new multi-million dollar plan is being rolled out to address compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, calls are being made for heightened discussion on disability to foster greater inclusion.