Impacts of the Americans with Disabilities Act on Transit Agency Liability (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 7-14
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 7... ...
7 the employer's judgment as to what functions of a job are essential, and if an employer has prepared a written description before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job, this description shall be considered evidence of the essential functions of the job.47 Finally, the ADAAA amended Section 102 of the ADA so that 42 U.S.C.
|
From page 8... ...
8 prohibited under [the ADA] because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity."56 Section 12102(1)
|
From page 9... ...
9 In granting GDRTA's motion for summary judgment, the court ruled that GDRTA's accommodation for Brockmeier, a job-protected leave of absence, was reasonable.70 As stated, the issue of whether an employer must make a reasonable accommodation depends on whether the person is a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of the ADA. In Cooper v.
|
From page 10... ...
10 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the court stated that the courts "use the same standards to analyze a claim for discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act as they do a claim for discrimination under the" ADA as amended by the ADAAA.91 The case concerned whether the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) failed to accommodate an employee with a disability.
|
From page 11... ...
11 Plaintiff must establish that he was discriminated against "because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment." … Because the sole basis of Plaintiff 's claim is that the CTA refused to let him return to work because of his obesity, Plaintiff must show that his obesity constitutes an actual physical impairment under the ADA or that the CTA perceived Plaintiff to have a qualifying physical impairment.110 In dismissing the claim, the court found that "no federal appellate court has held that extreme obesity constitutes a disability under the ADA absent some underlying physiological basis."111 F Reasonable Accommodations for Employees with Disabilities Under the ADA, an employer may have to make a reasonable accommodation for an individual with a disability.
|
From page 12... ...
12 when the MBTA terminated the plaintiff 's employment, the court granted in part and denied in part MBTA's motion to dismiss.122 G Use of Medical Inquiries and Examinations The ADA also addresses when it is permissible for a covered entity to inquire of a job applicant about his or her disability or the nature or severity of it or to use a medical examination as a condition to employment.123 Pre-employment medical inquiries are allowed if they are relevant to an applicant's ability to perform job-related functions.124 An employer may require a medical examination of an applicant after an offer of employment and prior to the commencement of employment and may condition an employment offer on the results of an examination.125 However, all entering employees must be subject to the same examination regardless of disability, and the record must be kept confidential.126 It should be noted that the EEOC has published guidance on the ADA and disabilityrelated inquiries and any requirement of medical examinations.127 The requirement of a medical examination was at issue in Nichols v.
|
From page 13... ...
13 drugs…."139 However, the ADA precludes an employment action against an individual who "has successfully completed a supervised drug rehabilitation program and is no longer engaging in the illegal use of drugs, or has otherwise been rehabilitated successfully and is no longer engaging in such use" or when an individual "is participating in a supervised rehabilitation program and is no longer engaging in such use…."140 Two transit agencies responding to the survey reported that their agency had claims or cases in the past five years because of testing an employee to determine whether the employee was using or under the influence of alcohol while on duty.141 In Jarvela v. Crete Carrier Corp.,142 the Eleventh Circuit rejected Jarvela's claim that, when his employer terminated his employment, his clinical diagnosis of alcoholism was not "current" under 49 C.F.R.
|
From page 14... ...
14 have no impact on her work.156 A year later, McCray was informed that budget cuts in Maryland had resulted in her position being abolished.157 The court held that sovereign immunity bars McCray's age and disability discrimination claims.… "[A] n unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens." … This protection extends to state agencies.… Therefore, absent abrogation of sovereign immunity or consent from Maryland, McCray cannot seek injunctive or monetary relief from the MDOT or MTA.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.