An employer’s failure to provide a fragrance-free work environment does not equate to a failure to provide a reasonable accommodation or an adverse action against an employee, according to the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Alanis v. Metra. In fact, this case reiterates that employers are not required to provide every
Weighty Issues: Obesity And The But-For Test Under The ADAAA
Obesity is still a hot topic both in our health conscious culture and in our courtrooms where we continue to see ADAAA claims based on the notion that an employer fired an employee because the employee was obese. After the ADA was amended, there was some question about how the courts would treat obesity under the ADAAA, especially claims alleging that the employer regarded the employee as disabled. Fortunately, most federal courts to have considered the issue have concluded that obesity that is not a caused by an underlying physiological disorder is not a disability under the ADAAA. On February 3, 2017, an Arizona district court joined the Eighth, Sixth, and Second Circuits in holding that obesity (including even morbid obesity) cannot qualify as a disability under the ADAAA unless it falls outside the normal range and occurs as the result of a physiological disorder. In doing so, the Arizona court added its voice to the growing majority view expressly rejecting the EEOC’s contrary position on this issue.
Continue Reading Weighty Issues: Obesity And The But-For Test Under The ADAAA
Third Circuit Says “Last Call” for Employee Terminated After Caught Drinking While on FMLA “Bed Rest”
On January 31, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit joined the Seventh, Eighth and Tenth Circuits in holding that an employer’s honest belief that its employee was misusing FMLA leave is enough to defeat an FMLA retaliation claim. The court’s opinion in Capps v. Mondelez Global, LLC also serves as a reminder to employers that an employee’s request for intermittent FMLA leave may also trigger the employer’s obligation to engage in the interactive process with the employee under the ADA.
Continue Reading Third Circuit Says “Last Call” for Employee Terminated After Caught Drinking While on FMLA “Bed Rest”
Supreme Court Nominee Has Put “Reasonable” into Reasonable Accommodation Obligations
In case your news and twitter accounts are down, and you otherwise have not heard the news… President Trump has nominated Judge Gorsuch from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacant Supreme Court seat. There are surely countless articles about his nomination hitting the airwaves even as I type this, but for employers who struggle with leave management issues, a quick review of the Hwang v. Kansas State University decision, authored by Judge Gorsuch, may provide employers with hope that leave management law could move in the right direction.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Nominee Has Put “Reasonable” into Reasonable Accommodation Obligations
Disability and Leave Law Under President Trump: What’s Next?
Since Election Day, prognosticators and pundits have been speculating about how the Trump Administration’s actions will impact existing laws and regulations. Now that President Trump and his team have hit the ground running, what can we expect from the Department of Labor (including OFCCP), the EEOC and the President’s own executive actions in the areas
Seventh Circuit Delivers Blow to EEOC Wellness Program Challenge, But Avoids Ruling on ADA Safe Harbor
On January 25, 2017, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Flambeau, Inc., the Seventh Circuit rejected an EEOC challenge to an employer wellness program. The circuit court had the opportunity to address whether an employer’s wellness program was an involuntary medical examination pursuant to the ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12112(d)(4), but instead found the
Employee’s “Alternative Facts” Can’t Overcome Summary Judgment for Employer
As the week begins with new lexicon coming out of our nation’s capital, a recent federal court of appeals ruling reminds us that, in most situations, it’s the employer’s assessment of the facts, not the employee’s “alternative facts,” that matter when deciding the appropriate punishment for employee performance or misconduct issues. And, perhaps more importantly,
AARP Suffers a Setback in its Challenge to the EEOC’s Wellness Regulations
As previously discussed, AARP has filed suit against the EEOC and challenged the agency’s wellness regulations. See https://www.disabilityleavelaw.com/2016/10/articles/ada/the-eeocs-2016-wellness-program-regulations-the-saga-continues/ On December 29, 2016, this challenge suffered a setback. In the December 29, 2016 Memorandum Opinion, U.S. District Judge John D. Bates denied AARP’s request for preliminary injunction and held that the regulations would take effect
Eighth Circuit Leaves Open the Question of Whether a “Mixed-Motive” or “But-For” Causation Standard Should be Applied to Disability Discrimination Claims Under the ADA
On December 22, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion in the case of Oehmke v. Medtronic, Inc., Case No. 16-1052, affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant/employer on plaintiff’s claims of disability discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). In its opinion, the Eighth Circuit analyzed the plaintiff’s disability discrimination claim under a mixed-motive causation standard, meaning that the Court would allow the plaintiff’s claim to proceed if it found evidence that the adverse employment action was motivated by both permissible and impermissible factors. In other words, under a mixed-motive analysis, if a discriminatory intent contributed in any way to the adverse employment action, a plaintiff can establish the causation element of a claim for disability discrimination.
Continue Reading Eighth Circuit Leaves Open the Question of Whether a “Mixed-Motive” or “But-For” Causation Standard Should be Applied to Disability Discrimination Claims Under the ADA
Appellate Court Holds that ADA Does Not Require Reassignment Without Competition
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) suffered a setback in its attempt to establish that the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) requires an employer to reassign an employee to an available position without having to compete with other candidates for that position. In EEOC v. St. Joseph’s Hospital, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals