A few months ago, I was waxing poetic about plutonium, how to establish essential job functions, and quality-testing diet scrapple. What got into me?
Now, I’ve got a cautionary tale, in the form of a recent federal court opinion, to help you good folks navigate away from some of the Americans with Disabilities Act traps. Lest you like litigation and lawyer bills.
By Versageek (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons
Allowing an alcoholic to attend AA to remain clean and sober? That works.
But, accommodating an alcoholic who “falls off the wagon,” gets a DUI, and needs time off from work because he is incarcerated? Not so much.
No, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t say, “Oh, word?” But, it did just toss a $2,600,000 jury award in favor of a pharmacist in an Americans With Disabilities Act case.
Who knew?
I received a lot of feedback on last week’s post. That was the one about an EEOC lawsuit alleging that a company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when it allegedly failed to accommodate a disabled employee’s request to use a service dog.
Among the reader feedback was a question about what happens when permitting an employee to use a service dog would cause another employee’s pet allergies to flare up.
But, will the EEOC’s bark be louder than its bite?
I’ll discuss service animals and Americans with Disabilities Act accommodations after the jump…
Are you headed to Washington, DC for SHRM’s 2017 Employment Law and Legislative Conference on March 13-15? I’d love to meet up with you.
Well, unless you’re really creepy. Continue reading
Here’s a snippet from a recent EEOC press release:
The [Americans with Disabilities Act] protects employees from discrimination based on their disabilities and requires employers to make reasonable accommodations to employees’ and applicants’ disabilities as long as it does not pose an undue hardship.
That’s employees and applicants. And, that’s important.
With over 24 hours to marinate, I think back on Super Bowl LI and I’m still amazed.
I mean, how good does The Fate of the Furious look! Pretty sure there was a submarine chasing an orange Lamborghini on a frozen tundra! Yeah, now I know what Charlie Sheen truly meant by “Winning!”
Look, my betting days (largely derivative of my Vegas card-counting past) are behind me. But, while I’m here to dispense non-legal employment-law advice — we’ll get to that in a sec — I can give you a little non-gambling wagering advice too. If I had a spare sawbuck, I’d plunk it down on a parlay of Jason Statham for Best Supporting Actor and The Rock/Vin Diesel (tie) splitting the Best Actor award at the 2018 Oscars. Just sayin’.
And, here you probably thought that your Respect Cup for me couldn’t runneth over.
Continuing with yesterday’s theme of appellate courts peeing on the Cheerios of plaintiffs in failure-to-accommodate cases…
Wait, can I say that?
***Checks blogging scriptures***
***burps***
Yep.
The Employer Handbook Blog