ADA

No jury trials for disability retaliation—but you still must handle complaints properly

01/14/2010

Thanks to a recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, employers no longer face the prospect of jury trials to resolve ADA retaliation claims. That’s a big victory, since juries are notorious for returning large awards against employers. Plus, the decision makes it clear that punitive damages are not available for retaliation, either.

Strictly limit employee medical information just to those who need to know

01/12/2010

The ADA requires employers to maintain strict confidentiality on any medical- or disability-related information. That means keeping it in a separate, secure file, away from prying eyes that have no business viewing the information. But confidentiality doesn’t apply just to paper or electronic records. Employers also have to make sure they don’t discuss such information with those who don’t need to know.

Hudson Valley Hospital not so sweet to diabetic employee

01/12/2010

Westchester County’s Hudson Valley Hospital will pay $142,500 to settle an EEOC charge in which a diabetic nurse claimed she suffered disability discrimination. Glorianne Romano asked to have three days in a row off each week following an episode when she went into a diabetic coma in 2007. Her doctor said she needed the time off to regulate her insulin treatments. At first, the hospital agreed, but then withdrew the accommodation, claiming Romano’s schedule was too disruptive.

Lawsuit-free hiring: The 5 laws you need to know & 4 steps you need to take

01/06/2010

When it comes to employment lawsuits, HR is a lot like flying an airplane: The most risky parts of the trip are at the takeoff (hiring) and the landing (dismissal). With hiring, you can limit the employment-law risks by following the legally safe steps and training supervisors to do the same.

2009 in labor and employment law, from A to Z

01/05/2010

Our friends at the law firm of Fisher & Phillips LLP recently published this entertaining look at the employment law year that was. From A (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) to Z (zealously), 2009 was a busy year for those who track employment law trends.

Evaluating employee before return to work? Know difference between medical, agility tests

12/25/2009

Under the ADA, employers aren’t allowed to subject employees to medical tests unless they can prove that the examinations are job-related and consistent with business necessity. However, they can ask employees to perform agility tests. The line between the two is difficult to find. But get it wrong, and you may have an ADA discrimination case on your hands.

Agreement with DOJ aims for a more accessible Wilmington

12/24/2009

The city of Wilmington has entered into an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to make the city more accessible to people with disabilities. Under the agreement, the city will make physical modifications to its government facilities so parking lots, routes into the buildings, entrances, public telephones, restrooms, service counters and drinking fountains are accessible to persons with disabilities.

Go ahead and grant ‘disability leave’— but don’t assume employee is disabled

12/23/2009

Employees sometimes assume that if their employer approves a request for disability leave, they must be disabled and are therefore entitled to reasonable accommodations when they return to work. That’s simply not the case. Many times, what’s called “disability leave” is really FMLA leave, based on the employee’s serious health condition. But those conditions are frequently temporary and wouldn’t qualify as a disability under the ADA.

Call lawyer about new accommodation class

12/22/2009

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, with jurisdiction over California employers, has ruled that the federal Rehabilitation Act covers discrimination claims brought by an independent contractor. The Rehabilitation Act applies to federal agencies, government contractors and organizations that receive federal funding.

Document your concern about employee before ordering a fitness-for-duty exam

12/17/2009

The ADA prohibits employers from demanding fitness-for-duty exams unless the exams are “job related and consistent with business necessity.” Employers can demand an exam if they have a reasonable belief that an employee’s medical condition will impair his or her ability to perform essential job functions or will pose a safety threat. If you believe either is the case, document your objective and reasonable beliefs before demanding the exam.

ADA