Search
The Employer Handbook Blog
SCOTUS to Retirees: You Can’t Spell ADA Without a J-O-B
The ADA bars discrimination against employees with disabilities. But what if the discrimination doesn’t happen until after the employee retires? According to the Supreme Court, the ADA doesn’t follow you into retirement.
TL;DR: A firefighter who retired early due to disability sued under the ADA after her post-retirement health coverage expired. But the Supreme Court said she couldn’t bring a claim under Title I of the ADA because she was no longer a “qualified individual”—meaning she didn’t hold or seek a job at the time of the alleged discrimination. Bottom line: no job, no claim.
A Policy Change With Lasting Impact
The plaintiff in this case worked as a firefighter for nearly two decades. When she was hired in 1999, her public-sector employer offered health coverage until age 65 to retirees who either completed 25 years of service or retired early due to disability. But in 2003, the employer revised the policy: only 25-year retirees would remain covered until 65. Disability retirees would receive just 24 months of coverage.
She continued working until 2018, when a disability forced her to retire early. In 2020, her health coverage ended—exactly as the revised policy required. She sued under the ADA, claiming the policy discriminated against employees who retire because of disability.
The ADA Stops at the Job Door
The case turned on a key statutory phrase: “qualified individual.” Under the ADA, that means someone who, with or without accommodation, can perform the essential functions of a job they hold or desire. Present-tense verbs, said the Court, signal present employment. And since the plaintiff was already retired when her benefits ended, she didn’t qualify.
The Court emphasized that Title I of the ADA focuses on workplace discrimination. Its terms and remedies—job restructuring, modified training materials, employment tests—don’t make sense for retirees. That distinction mattered.
Timing Matters—But the Complaint Didn’t Deliver
Could a retiree ever bring a claim over post-employment benefits? Maybe. The Court suggested that if the alleged discrimination happened while the person still held or sought a job, it might qualify. But in this case, the complaint didn’t allege that.
Although the plaintiff developed Parkinson’s before she retired, she didn’t plead that she was affected by the policy while she was still working. She even told the Eleventh Circuit that she wasn’t. That boxed her out of a potentially stronger claim—and boxed the Court into affirming the dismissal.
Employer Takeaways
- The ADA’s workplace protections don’t cover retirees.
Title I protects people in jobs or seeking jobs—not those who’ve already left the workforce. - Watch the timing of policy changes.
Discrimination can occur when a policy is adopted, applied, or when someone becomes subject to it. But claims will fail if the plaintiff wasn’t a “qualified individual” at that moment. - Bad facts in a complaint can sink a good theory.
The Court left the door open for future plaintiffs—but warned that “conceivable-but-convoluted” claims won’t cut it. Specific, timely allegations matter. - This ruling doesn’t touch other laws.
The ADA isn’t the only game in town. Retirees might still have claims under the Rehabilitation Act, Section 1983, or state anti-discrimination laws.
The Court’s Bottom Line
The ADA protects people, not benefits—and only in the employment context. If the alleged discrimination happens after an employee retires, and they no longer hold or seek a job, Title I likely doesn’t apply.
But timing matters. A retiree may still have a claim if they were a “qualified individual” at the time the employer adopted, applied, or subjected them to a discriminatory policy. The Court left that door open—but made clear that a vague or incomplete complaint won’t be enough to walk through it.