In the high-stakes world of trucking, the looming threat of serious accident litigation is a constant reality for many companies. When such situations arise, it’s crucial for owners and executives to understand that the future of their company may be at stake. This was a key takeaway from the recent address by Rob Moseley, a
Legal Update
Posted by
Defending ADA Claims
Accommodations Are Irrelevant if an Employee Can’t Work
Please note that this article is a general summary and does not attempt to cover your specific situation or detail the obligations you have under state or federal law. Natalie Higgins is a labor and employment lawyer based in St. Louis, Missouri. She represents employers in all facets of litigation as well as providing consulting and training services to employers who want to proactively manage their employee litigation risks. Questions about your business to improve its discipline policy? Contact Natalie at natalie@hugheslawyersllc.com.
The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld Summary Judgment in favor of an employer who had terminated an employee after she qualified for long term disability benefits. In Blevins v. AT&T Services, Blevins alleged that AT&T failed to provide an accommodation to her based upon her physical disabilities. MLW No. 72416. Blevins suffered from multiple sclerosis and was unable to wear the telephone headset she previously used to perform her job duties or to type on her computer. The parties engaged in multiple conversations as to whether they could find a different way for Blevins to perform her job duties. After researching voice activated software, however, they determined that the programs still required more typing than Blevins was capable of.
In its Motion for Summary Judgment, AT&T argued that Blevins was not a qualified individual within the meaning of the ADA. Blevins argued that AT&T failed to engage in the interactive process which is required under the ADA and that they could have accommodated her restrictions and allowed her to keep working. AT&T countered that they had, in fact, engaged in the interactive process but that no reasonable accommodation was available.
In its opinion, the District Court judge explained that Blevins had to prove that she could perform the essential functions of her job in order to be a qualified individual under the ADA. The undisputed evidence in the case, however, demonstrated that Blevins could not work at all, even with an accommodation, due to restrictions placed upon her by her doctor. Blevins’ doctors all recommended that Blevins not return to work due to her ongoing health issues. With this evidence before the trial court, summary judgment was granted and then affirmed on appeal to the 8th Circuit.
Employee disability and employee leave issues are complex and should be handled with the guidance of a professional. There are many best practices seen in the Blevins case which were executed by the employer. For instance, the employer followed the ADA’s requirement to engage in the interactive process and thoroughly documented the efforts which they underwent to examine potential accommodations. This evidence is critical and persuasive to judges and juries who want to see that employers are giving their employees a “fair shake”. The employer also followed their own internal policies and procedures and the plaintiff conceded that these policies were followed in the process. Employers garner favor from judges and juries by treating their employees in a fair and uniform manner. Following internal policies and applying them in a consistent manner is key evidence in the event of an employment lawsuit.
Please note that this article is a general summary and does not attempt to cover your specific situation or detail the obligations you have under state or federal law. Natalie Higgins is a labor and employment lawyer based in St. Louis, Missouri. She represents employers in all facets of litigation as well as providing consulting and training services to employers who want to proactively manage their employee litigation risks. Questions about your business to improve its discipline policy? Contact Natalie at natalie@hugheslawyersllc.com.
