Tag: ADA

  • Teacher with PTSD entitled to accommodation under ADA, 2nd Circuit says

    Teacher with PTSD entitled to accommodation under ADA, 2nd Circuit says

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • A high school math teacher with post-traumatic stress disorder was entitled to a 15-minute break as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act even if she didn’t need one to perform her job’s essential functions, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held March 25 in Tudor v. Whitehall Central School District.
    • The high school math teacher in New York sued her school district under the ADA for failing to accommodate her PTSD, according to court documents. She claimed the school district refused to guarantee her a 15-minute break every afternoon during the 2019-2020 school year. She said she used the breaks to compose herself away from the workplace, which tended to trigger her symptoms.
    • The teacher acknowledged that even without the breaks, she could perform her job’s essential functions, albeit “under great duress and harm.” On that basis, the district court found she had no failure-to-accommodate claim and granted summary judgment against her. The 2nd Circuit vacated the ruling and sent the case back for reconsideration.

    Dive Insight:

    Prohibited discrimination under the ADA includes, absent undue hardship to the employer, “not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability,” the 2nd Circuit explained, quoting the statute.

    In turn, the ADA defines a “qualified individual” as “an individual who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions” of their job, the appeals court pointed out.

    The district court, relying on this wording, incorrectly inferred that an employee who can perform the job’s essential functions without an accommodation does not, as a matter of law, have a claim for failure to accommodate, the panel said.

    But “a straightforward reading of the ADA confirms that an employee may qualify for a reasonable accommodation even if she can perform the essential functions of her job” without an accommodation, the 2nd Circuit emphasized.

    In other words, “accommodations that are not strictly necessary for an employee’s performance of essential functions may still be reasonable and therefore required by the ADA,” the court held.

    The 2nd Circuit, which covers Connecticut, New York and Vermont, noted that most of the other federal circuit courts of appeal have made similar rulings.

    Relevant to the teacher’s case, the ADA defines reasonable accommodation to include job restructuring or modifying an employee’s schedule, the 2nd Circuit said. A modified schedule may involve adjusting arrival or departure times or providing periodic breaks, according to a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance.

    For instance, the EEOC announced last week that a construction supply company agreed to pay $150,000 to settle allegations it failed to provide a diabetic worker with requested snack breaks throughout the day to regulate his blood sugar.

    Reasonable accommodations also include allowing an employee to use accrued paid leave and providing unpaid leave, the EEOC guidance states.

    However, the “reasonableness” of a requested accommodation is a fact-specific question, the 2nd Circuit explained.

    On remand, the school district might demonstrate that the teacher’s request for a break while assigned to afternoon study hall was unreasonable and imposed an undue hardship, the court pointed out.

    At the same time, the teacher’s long history of receiving her requested accommodation and the school district’s evolving policies indicated that her request may have been reasonable, notwithstanding that she performed her essential functions without it, the 2nd Circuit noted.

    Court documents reflected that in 2008, the teacher sought and received permission to take one 15-minute break during each of her morning and afternoon “prep periods,” when she wasn’t responsible for overseeing students.

    In 2016, the school district indicated she needed to submit additional documentation to support her request. Rather than doing so, the teacher took paid sick leave and then leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, according to court records.

    When she returned from FMLA leave in 2017, and throughout the 2018-2019 school year, she was allowed to take a morning and afternoon break when a school librarian could watch the students.

    At issue here were the afternoon breaks the following year that she wasn’t guaranteed (but took anyway) when the librarian or another employee wasn’t to cover for her, court records reflected.

    Source link

  • EEOC Adds Technical Assistance Guidance to Clarify When COVID-19 Is Considered a Disability Under the ADA – CUPA-HR

    EEOC Adds Technical Assistance Guidance to Clarify When COVID-19 Is Considered a Disability Under the ADA – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | December 22, 2021

    On December 14, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released additional COVID-19 technical assistance to clarify certain circumstances under which employers and employees may consider COVID-19 a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act. The guidance, which is presented in a Q&A format, focuses broadly on the definition of disability under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act and provides examples detailing how an individual diagnosed with COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 conditions could be considered to have a disability under these laws.

    According to an EEOC press release, the technical assistance adds the following key guidance:

    • An applicant’s or employee’s COVID-19 may cause impairments that can be considered disabilities under the ADA, regardless of whether the initial case of COVID-19 itself constituted an actual disability.
    • An applicant or employee with mild COVID-19 symptoms that resolve in a few weeks with no other consequences will not have a disability as defined under the ADA that would make them eligible to receive a reasonable accommodation.
    • Applicants or employees with disabilities under the ADA are entitled to a reasonable accommodation when their disability requires it, and the accommodation is not an undue hardship for the employer. They are not automatically entitled to reasonable accommodations under the ADA. Employers can choose to do more than the ADA requires.
    • Employers risk violating the ADA if they prevent employees from returning to work once the employee is no longer infectious and is medically able to return to work without posing a threat to infect others.

    The EEOC also clarifies that this technical guidance differs from July guidance from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which addresses “Long COVID” as a Disability under Sections 504 and 1557 of the ADA. According to the press release, the DOJ and HHS guidance only focuses on long COVID, while the EEOC’s new technical assistance focuses more broadly on COVID-19 in the context of Title I of the ADA and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, which covers employment.

    CUPA-HR will continue to keep members apprised of any COVID-19 guidance as it relates to disability and discrimination under EEO law.



    Source link