In a comment to this blog entry, I discussed the panel decision of the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. Ford Motor Company where the panel held that telecommuting was a reasonable accommodation. Before proceeding further, I want to thank Jon Hyman for alerting me through his blog that the en banc decision came down
essential functions of the job
Do places of higher education with training programs and technical standards now have permission to freely discriminate against persons with disabilities?
By William Goren on
In one of my most popular blog entries, ADA compliance auditing: higher education version, I mention technical standards in a comment to that entry. Many training programs as a condition of accreditation have developed technical standards that people in the program must meet in order to get into the program and stay into the…
How not to defend essential functions of the job
By William Goren on
In a previous blog entry, I discussed how a company could do an excellent job of defending litigation over what are essential functions of the job. This particular blog entry deals with the opposite scenario, where the company does not do a very good job at all of accomplishing that task. The case is…
Why the majority and dissenting opinion in the Ninth Circuit case of Weaving v. City of Hillsboro both got it wrong
By William Goren on
I first found out about this case- Weaving v. City of Hillsboro, a published decision from the Ninth Circuit decided August 15, 2014- from reading Jon Hyman’s excellent blog entry on it, which can be found here.
Jon does an excellent job of describing the facts of the case and I quote from…
Is pregnancy a disability? The true false version
By William Goren on
Three of my colleagues, Robin Shea, Eric Meyer, and Jon Hyman have written excellent blog entries on the latest EEOC guidance dealing with pregnancy discrimination. There is also a section of that guidance dealing with how pregnancy may also constitute disability discrimination under certain circumstances. I thought it would be informative if I…
Should we now be asking when to bother with the Rehabilitation Act and preventive tips can come from anywhere
By William Goren on
Jon Hyman’s blog is in my blogroll and I want to thank him for calling to my attention the case of Sjostrand v. The Ohio State University. Jon, as always, did a great job in his blog entry, but I want to take a different approach. What I want to discuss is how this…
Is attendance always an essential function of the job?
By William Goren on
When the ADA first was enacted back in 1990 and went into effect in 1992, the Internet was just getting started. Back then, it was pretty obvious to everyone that an essential function of the job must mean showing up for it. Since then, technology has evolved quite a bit so now many people can…
Undue Hardship in the Financial Sense: A Viable Defense?
By William Goren on
Posted in Federal Cases, Title I
This blog entry can be divided neatly into two parts. In the first part, I play a game of true false based upon the issues that arose in the recent case of Attiiogbe-Tay v. Southeast Rolling Hills LLC, which recently came down from the United States District Court of Minnesota. The second part explores…
Some useful things to know about regarded as claims
By William Goren on
In order to get damages under title I of the ADA, you have to show intentional discrimination. In order to get damages under title II of the ADA, you have to show deliberate indifference. But what does intentional discrimination mean with respect to a regarded as claim? Must there be discriminatory animus or can there…
Some thoughts on retaliation and the ADA
By William Goren on
42 U.S.C. § 12203(a) prohibits retaliation against an individual opposing any act or practice that violate the ADA or because the individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner an investigation, proceeding or hearing. Over the last few weeks, I have come across a few cases in the retaliation area that deserve…