Disability

The EEOC’s subpoena power is crazazy broad. Wooo!!!

July 23, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

On behalf of an illiterate man, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigated a Charge of Discrimination against a MD employer, which allegedly had a literacy policy that violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (by discriminating against qualified individuals with learning disabilities). As part of its investigation, the EEOC served an extremely broad subpoena on the employer. The employer fought the subpoena hard. Ultimately; however, it learned that the EEOC has the power.

You’ll learn too (and figure out why this post has a picture of Ric Flair)…after the jump…

* * *

Fact or Fiction: Disabilities under the ADAAA cannot be episodic

June 14, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

That’s right folks. It’s time for another edition of “Fact or Fiction” a/k/a “Quick Answers to Quick Questions” a/k/a QATQQ f/k/a “I don’t feel like writing a long blog post.”

So, let’s get right to it. In Pearce-Mato v. Shinseki, decided earlier this week, a Pennsylvania federal court reminded us that episodic impairments may, indeed, be disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act:

The fact that the periods during which an episodic impairment is active and substantially limits a major life activity may be brief or occur infrequently is no longer relevant to determining whether the impairment substantially limits a major life activity … An impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active.

The ADA does not protect medical-marijuana use, but…

May 30, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

According to a federal appellate court from California, a state that has embraced marijuana as an effective treatment for individuals who face debilitating pain, an employer may discriminate against an employee because of the employee’s use of marijuana. This holds true whether the marijuana use is recreational or medicinal, because the Americans with Disabilities Act does not protect illegal drug use.

However, there are instances in which the ADA does protect medical-marijuana users. For example, an employee who uses medical marijuana to treat glaucoma may be discriminated against because of the employee’s marijuana use, but not the glaucoma. Assuming that: (a) the glaucoma is a disability; (b) the employee can perform essential job functions with or without a reasonable accommodation; and (c) and the employer takes an adverse employment action against the employee because of the glaucoma, the employer has violated the ADA.

For more on the CA case, check out Robin Shea’s post at the Employment and Labor Insider. For more on the interplay between medical-marijuana use and state disability-discrimination laws, check out this post I did last year.

How to lose a disability discrimination case in 5 easy steps…

May 24, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

What started out well for the employer…

On April 29, 2009, Catherine Coffman, an employee of Robert J. Young Company, Inc. (“RJY”), got into a motorcycle accident. RJY provided Ms. Coffman with leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Just before Ms. Coffman’s FMLA expired, RJY offered to return her to work in a sedentary job that provided the same pay and benefits as her old position. Ms. Coffman rejected the offer because she did not feel that she was able to return to work yet.

…Quickly turned bad. Very bad.

Does the ADA require accommodating an employee’s commute to work?

May 21, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Let’s say you have an employee with narcolepsy. This employee has been working for you for years with no issue. But business needs changed and you reassign this narcoleptic employee to a new shift. Shortly thereafter, the employee comes into HR and requests a shift change. Your response is take FMLA or quit.

Have you violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate the shift-change request?

Find out after the jump…

* * *

Report: Employees share WAY more Facebook info than they think

May 7, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Maryland has a new law forbidding employers from demanding that job applicants and employees divulge online passwords. Two weeks ago, the federal government proposed similar legislation. And, last week, news surfaced that Delaware may be placing the same restrictions on employers.

But who needs to demand online passwords, when, according to this report from Consumer Reports, your employees are sharing way more information on Facebook than they realize.

Some of the highlights from the report and a few related tips for employers follow after the jump…

* * *

ADA potpourri, anyone?

April 17, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Smells like patchouli. Or is that teen spirit?

Hey, it’s been a long day.

Can an employer insist on regular attendance without violating the ADA? Maybe. says Robin Shea at the Employment and Labor Insider. And forget about indefinite leave as a reasonable accommodation under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination says the NJ Superior Court Appellate Division. That won’t fly under the Americans with Disabilities Act either says the United States District Court of the Western District of Virginia, Danville Division. But, you knew that already. Still, if you need information on Practices and Policies Related to Recruiting and Hiring Employees With Disabilities, SHRM has a new survey. Check it out.

Mini horse + reasonable accommodation lawsuit = I told you so!

April 13, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Remember back in July 2011 when I told you that a miniature horse might be reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act?

Giddy-up! I whinny!

Ok, I’ll quit horsing around.

(I mare or may not be referring to a printed-out list of horse puns as I type this…)

More on this hare-raising story — rabbit puns too? Really, Eric? — after the jump…

* * *

Distinguishing state & federal disability-accommodation claims

March 20, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Let’s say you operate a business in NJ. Your disabled employee comes to you requesting an accommodation for his disability. Does the mere failure to provide that accommodation trigger a claim under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD)? What about under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?

I have two recent cases and two different answers — depending on whether you are in state or federal court, plus some general accomodation tips for employers after the jump…

* * *

More on obesity and ADA discrimination

March 9, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Back in December, I wrote here about a federal court in Louisiana recognizing that a morbidly-obese plaintiff may have a physical impairment which, if it substantially limits one or more major life activities, would bring that plaintiff within the scope of the ADA (the pre-ADAAA version).

As an update to that post, last week, the same Louisiana federal court granted summary judgment, in part, to the EEOC, who was asserting the claim on behalf of the employee. Specifically, the court ruled that the EEOC had affirmatively established that the employee, who was morbidly obese, had a “disability” within the meaning of the ADA.

Disclaimer: I serve as an EEOC mediator.