HRCentral News

Subscribe or Remove

Enter your e-mail address below to receive our complimentary newsletter every month. This is a confidential service and your information will NOT be shared with any third parties.


Add Remove
Send as HTML
 


Archive
A New Bar for Performance
Adding Flexibility to Flexible Spending Accounts
Are Your Exempt Employees Really Exempt?
Basic Training on Military Leave
Cleaning Up Your I-9s
Conducting Background Checks
Damaging Surprises
DOL Issues New Overtime Regulations
Fighting Complacency
Getting Off Probabtion
HIPAA, the Employer, and Employee Privacy
Leadership: The Missing Link
New Rules for Handling a COBRA
Preparing for Unexpected Emergencies
Providing Notice When an Employee Uses FMLA
Technology Corner
The Day Before Taxes, a HIPAA Deadline Looms
The Government is Working Overtime on Changes to the FLSA
Times are Changing, So Get Out and Vote!
Travel Time Pay for Nonexempt Employees
Weingarten Removed from Nonunion Workplaces
U.S. Supreme Court Analyzes the ADA
by Steve Norman, J.D.

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued several key decisions this year regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  The ADA prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities that substantially impair one or more major life activities.  It also requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities if the individual cannot perform the essential functions of his or her job without the accommodation.
 
The first decision the Court released was Toyota Motor Manufacturing v. Williams which narrowed the definition of major life activity.  The Court said that for a disability to substantially limit the major life activity of performing manual tasks, it must prevent the individual from performing not only the manual tasks associated with the person’s job, but also manual tasks central to the daily lives of most people such as bathing, brushing one’s teeth and doing laundry.
 
After the Toyota decision, the Court ruled in U.S. Airways v. Barnett that an employer does not have to violate a seniority system by giving an assignment to an individual with a disability instead of an individual with more seniority simply to accommodate the individual with the disability.  It is only necessary to pass over the more senior employee if special circumstances justify the decision.
 
Finally, in June, the Court held in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Echazabal that an employer can refuse to place an individual with a disability in a position if the duties of the position pose a direct threat to the individual’s own health.  A physical exam revealed that Echazabal had a liver condition that would have been aggravated if he had been exposed to toxins that were present in the work he would have been doing in the position he applied for.
 
What should you do?

In light of these decisions, what are your responsibilities as an employer?  First and foremost, have job descriptions for every position in the company that outline the essential functions of each position and any physical requirements the position has such as the need to regularly lift twenty-five pounds.  Job descriptions help set the expectations for what the individual will be required to do in the position.
 
Second, the Chevron decision does not require you to anticipate or diagnose an individual’s physical or mental condition.  The individual still has to initiate a request for accommodation.  However, once the individual does so, the law requires the employer to engage in an interactive process to determine if the disability qualifies under the ADA and if so, whether the employee’s requested accommodation is reasonable.
 
Not all disabilities qualify under the ADA.  First, the condition must be a physical or mental condition that is chronic or long-term, usually at least one year in length.  Second, the condition must substantially impair one or more major life activities such as caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, working and participating in community activities.  Third, the condition must prevent the individual from performing the essential functions of his or her position.  If any one of these three conditions is not met, the individual’s disability does not qualify under the Act and you are not required to accommodate the individual, though you may opt to do so at your own discretion.
 
Third, if the individual’s disability qualifies under the ADA, you must determine if his or her requested accommodation is reasonable.  This involves evaluating not only whether the accommodation is affordable and will not create an undue hardship on your company, but also whether the requested action will adequately accommodate the individual’s condition and enable him or her to perform the essential functions of his or her position.  To satisfy this second factor, HRCentral recommends consulting with the individual’s doctor as part of the interactive process with the individual.  Provide a copy of the job description for the position the individual is working in or applying for so that the doctor can determine if the requested accommodation will have the desired result.  If not, it will be necessary to determine if there are alternative reasonable accommodations.  If no reasonable accommodations exist you are not required to take any further action.
 
Applying the ADA can be difficult, but there are many resources available to help employers evaluate accommodation requests and determine the best possible solutions.  If you are a current client of HRCentral and you would like to review or update your job descriptions or discuss a request for accommodation, call your HRCentral contact right away.  If you are not a current client of HRCentral and are concerned about your exposure to this type of liability, call 425-462-6286 to learn more.


[PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION]
Published by HRCentral
Copyright © 2002 HRCentral Corporation. All rights reserved.

View Newsletter Archives
Created with eNewsBuilder