Showing 38 posts in Disability.

Seventh Circuit Reiterates Standard for Establishing Substantial Limitation on the Ability to Work

December 23, 2015 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

It goes without saying that an employee cannot prevail on a disability discrimination claim unless he is actually disabled. In the context of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), this means that he must show that a disability “substantially limits” one or more of his “major life activities.”  Predictably, plaintiffs often allege that the “major life activity” that their disability has impacted is the activity of “working." Thus, an important question for employers is this: when does a disability actually limit an employee’s ability to work? More ›

Lie Rejecter: Employer's Fraud Defense to Disabled Employee's Claim Fails

March 20, 2015 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

It's no secret that in formulating their defense to employment claims, employers often seek to discredit employees' allegations through the employees' own contradictory statements or positions taken. This issue arises most frequently in the disability discrimination context, where, to prevail, an employee must prove that he was able to perform the essential functions of his position, with or without accommodation. But if the employee has sworn to another entity, agency, or court that he is disabled and therefore incapable of working (so that he can get certain unemployment or disability benefits, for example), does this seemingly obvious contradiction sound the death knell on his discrimination claim? Maybe not. More ›

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

February 23, 2015 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

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.  More ›

Employer's "Super Policy" Against Harassment Requires Employer to Protect Employee Beyond that Which is Required by Law

December 3, 2014 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

A Costco employee suffered from Tourette's syndrome and made complaints to management about the way his supervisors and others were treating him. He later filed charges with the Connecticut Human Rights Organization as well as suit in federal district court, claiming that he was subjected to a hostile work environment and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and corresponding state statutes. He also claimed breach of contract and promissory estoppel.  More ›

The ADAAA Strikes Again: Fourth Circuit Finds that Employee's Simple, Temporary Knee Injury was w Disability

January 29, 2014 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

In a first-of-its-kind decision at the federal appellate level, the Fourth Circuit last week decided whether a temporary, non-recurring impairment can be a disability under the ADA as amended by the 2008 ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA). Unsurprisingly, the court found that it could. More ›

Federal Court: Teacher’s Anxiety About Losing her job was an ADA Disability

October 7, 2013 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

Could an employee’s anxiety over the possibility of being fired be a disability under federal law?  Yes it can, according to one federal court in South Dakota. More ›

Employee’s Need for time off for Medical Reasons does not Protect her from Termination

May 9, 2013 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

The Seventh Circuit Court of appeals recently affirmed summary judgment for the employer on an employee's ADA and FMLA claims. In this case, the employee was terminated after she was absent many times due to symptoms (and the ultimate diagnosis) of multiple sclerosis. She was unable to adhere to the company's attendance guidelines, was not eligible for leave, and could not perform the essential functions of her job (e.g., attendance) even with reasonable accommodation.  More ›

Court Finds Epileptic Employee not "Qualified Individual" Under ADA or Missouri Law

May 8, 2013 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

A mammography technician with epilepsy had suffered numerous seizures at work. The technician suffered epileptic seizures unpredictably, and they caused her to lose orientation and muscle control, which led to falls and injuries. The risk of injury to the technician and patients was too great, and the employer placed her on paid administrative leave. The employer thereafter made various other accommodations in order to eliminate environmental triggers to her seizures. Though she returned to work, the seizures continued. Her continued seizures and failure to find a accommodation led to the employer placing the technician on unpaid administrative leave. Once she began taking medicine to help control her seizures, the employer offered to reinstate her, but she refused.  More ›

Being on time to work may be Essential Function of Position

March 8, 2013 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

A city case manager had schizophrenia but was taking medication on a calibrated schedule. The employer had a flex-time policy which allowed employees to arrive at work anytime within a one hour window in the morning. If an employee was late, the supervisor had to approve or disprove the tardiness. The employee often could not get to work within that window of time due to his medication, and for roughly ten years, the employer excused such tardiness and allowed him to arrive later. Subsequently, however, the supervisor ceased approving the late arrivals. The employee repeatedly requested that he be permitted to arrive later so that he would not be disciplined for tardiness, but his supervisor would not allow it. His doctor recommended that his medication schedule not be altered at that time, which made it difficult for him to arrive earlier. The supervisor then recommended disciplinary action against the employee for his long history of tardiness, and at a grievance hearing, the City recommended his termination. The union representative argued that the employee’s mitigating circumstances (the disability) should be considered. The employee then made formal requests for accommodation to arrive at work later, and a higher-level supervisor denied the request without talking to the employee. He was then suspended for 30 days without pay as a sanction for his tardiness.  More ›

Eighth Circuit Revives Deaf Lifeguard’s Disability Claim

January 14, 2013 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

A deaf individual who could detect noises through the use of a cochlear implant and who used American Sign Language (ASL) to communicate successfully completed two lifeguard training programs through the county. Though he had an ASL interpreter to communicate verbal instructions, the interpreter did not assist him in executing lifesaving tasks. The individual applied for and was conditionally offered a lifeguard position subject to him passing a pre-employment physical. The doctor, however, determined that because the individual was deaf, he could not be a lifeguard, unless he was constantly accommodated. The county then undertook a job task analysis to determine whether the individual could perform the job with or without accommodation, and because it was uncertain whether the individual could safely work as a lifeguard by himself, the offer of employment was revoked. More ›

Search

Subscribe via Email

RSSSubscribe via RSS
TwitterFollow us on Twitter

Blog Editors

Blog Contributors

Archives