Supervisor not "Qualified Individual" Under ADA after Failing DOT Medical Certification

Determining the essential functions of a job can be tricky, especially if there is no information or documentation with which to compare and consider. In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit considered job qualifications in the context of essential functions, and ultimately found that the employee failed to demonstrate that he was qualified or could perform the essential functions of his position after failing a required DOT medical certification. As a result, he could not maintain his ADA claim against his former employer. 

In Hawkins v. Schwan's Home Service, Inc., No. 13-6149 (10th Cir. February 19, 2015), David Hawkins was a supervisor at a frozen food product sales and distribution center. His job duties involved "ordering products to be delivered by [the company's] delivery drivers, scheduling, and loading trucks with products." While his main job duties involved supervision and coordination, he also had to drive trucks to service appointments and shuttle trucks to salespeople in order to facilitate deliveries. This was set forth in the Qualifications section of the job description, which required Hawkins to have an "excellent driving record" and to meet the "Department of Transportation eligibility requirements, including appropriate driver's license and corresponding medical certification."

The facility at which Hawkins worked closed for a period of time. During that time, he drove company trucks from one location to another. Driving meant that he had to be DOT-qualified and have the required Medical Examiner's Certificate.

Later, Hawkins began to experience a host of medical issues, which resulted in him having a minor stroke and having a pacemaker implanted. Thereafter, he failed a routine DOT medical evaluation.

The employer notified Hawkins that he was being placed on a thirty-day leave because he did not pass the DOT recertification, and that he had thirty days in which to either obtain his certification or find a non-DOT position. Hawkins looked at other jobs in the company, but did not apply for any. He was subsequently terminated.

In the termination process, Hawkins executed a document which stated that he was voluntarily resigning from his position, but he hand wrote on the form that he was forced to quit for medical reasons.

Hawkins filed suit alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act. The district court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment and Hawkins appealed.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit did not find grounds for reversal. Instead, it agreed entirely with the district court's reasoning and conclusion that Hawkins was not a qualified individual with a disability because he could not perform the essential functions of his position, which included securing a DOT certification in order to drive the company's trucks. Even though he did not have to drive a truck every day, or for a certain period of time, all facility supervisors were required to be DOT qualified, his job description required that he be DOT qualified, and he was only one of two people at one of the facilities authorized to drive a company truck. Failing to have the DOT certification would seriously disrupt the company's business. The Court concluded that having the DOT certification was, therefore, an essential function of the position.

Hawkins claimed that the district court confused the issue of what amounts to job qualifications versus the essential functions of a position, and the Court of Appeals rejected this argument, finding that the specifications at issue (e.g., being able to drive a company truck, and therefore, needing to be DOT certified) were job-related, uniformly-enforced, and consistent with business necessity. The Court, therefore, affirmed the district court's ruling in whole.

While there is a difference between a job qualification and an essential function, here, any distinction was irrelevant because of the role that the qualification and function played. In the end, the supervisor had to be able to drive a company truck, and that meant he had to be able to pass the DOT medical certification. Because he could not do either, he was not a qualified individual under the law, and therefore, was unable to maintain his discrimination and retaliation claims against his employer. Job qualifications and essential functions may not always be so interchangeable. Employers are advised to review their job descriptions, job qualifications, and essential functions documentation to ensure that they are consistent, job-related, and uniformly enforced.

If you have any questions about this case or about your company's job qualifications or essential functions, please contact your Hinshaw employment attorney.