The Tenth Circuit joins the Third and First Circuits holding that workers who do not have an ADA-protected disability but who are regarded as having such a disability are entitled to accommodations. Four other circuits disagree.
An employee requested no forced overtime because of his depression. The employer prohibited all overtime for six months. No ADA violation because the employee did not complain that this accommodation was inadequate.
A cut finger caused co-workers to come into contact with a janitor’s blood. The employer may require a blood test for hepatitis and HIV which was found in this case to be “job-related and consistent with business necessity.”
The United States Supreme Court holds that in most cases, it would not be a reasonable Accommodation to trump the rules of a seniority system. However, there may be exceptions, such as when the employer previously made changes to the seniority system.
If an employee is disabled by a disease transmittable by food, and the risk can not be eliminated by a reasonable accommodation, the employee should not be working. For the EEOC guidance on this, visit www.eeoc.gov/facts/restaurant_guide.html.
A depressed employee did not have a protected disability since he obtained subsequent employment. His continued employment evidenced that the disability was short-lived and did not prevent him from working.
A diabetic warehouse supervisor needed breaks to monitor and treat his condition. The employer would not allow such breaks and argued the case should be dismissed since there was no adverse employment action. The Court disagreed, finding that the ADA does not require that an alleged failure to accommodate result in an adverse employment action.
The First Circuit found that “getting along with others” is not a major life activity. However, the Second Circuit finds that employees have ADA rights if they have trouble initiating contact and responding at the most basic level.
An employee at Goodyear suffered seizures in 1988 and 1989 that resulted in a job transfer. Since there had been no seizures since 1996, there is no evidence that epilepsy substantially limited the employee’s major life activities at the time of his discharge.
A driver lost his driver’s license for six months after receiving a defibrillator. He argued that the employer failed to accommodate him when it perceived him as disabled. Noting a split in the Circuits on the issue, a District Court in Maine sided with the driver.