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
What are the Limits of Employer Judgment? The Seventh Circuit Court Weighs In
Posted by
Your boss decides the essential functions of your job. But is there a limit on what they can require of you? A court has finally weighed in.
In Larry Tate v. Thomas Dart, the Seventh Circuit weighed in on a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Larry Tate says he was refused a promotion because his medical restrictions couldn’t be accommodated. He claims this is a violation of the ADA.
The ADA requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for a “qualified individual” to perform their job’s essential functions.
A Refused Promotion
Larry Tate worked for the sheriff in the Department of Corrections. Early in his career, he suffered a back injury. He returned to work under a strict medical restriction: he must avoid situations where there’s a significant change of violence or conflict.
Eventually, Tate became eligible for a promotion to lieutenant. HR said he needed medical clearance from his doctor because lieutenants were expected to confront and de-escalate violent scenarios.
The Department of Corrections stated that the ability to manage situations with a significant chance of violence or conflict was an “essential function” of the lieutenant position. Tate was denied the promotion.
Tate filed a lawsuit claiming his employer’s failure to accommodate his disability violated the ADA.
The Court’s Challenge
In this case, the court had to decide on two things:
- How far must an employer go to accommodate employees with disabilities?
- How respectful should the court be regarding the employer’s judgment on the essential functions of a job?
The Seventh Circuit Decides
The district court agreed that all lieutenants must be able to respond to inmate violence. Tate appealed the decision.
Then, the Seventh Circuit took up the case. It said the district court was “too deferential” to the employer’s judgment on job functions. But, it held up the district court’s decision.
The court reviewed several factors to determine the essential functions of the job:
- Written job descriptions
- Amount of time the function demands
- The employer’s statement about what functions are essential to the job
- Relevant collective bargaining terms
- Work conditions and experience of those in similar roles or those who served in the same role previously
It said its review, alongside the sheriff’s judgment, found that responding to inmate violence was an essential job function that Tate couldn’t perform. This meant Tate wasn’t considered a qualified individual for the position.
The Big Takeaways
The Seventh Circuit said an employer’s judgment is important, but it’s not necessarily the deciding factor. In order to protect yourself, make sure you follow these guidelines:
- Keep documentation to prove you considered all relevant factors.
- Ensure your written job descriptions clearly describe the conditions of work and expected functions.
- Be honest about how often others perform these essential functions for the same role.
- Stay in touch with a lawyer experienced in employment law.
Hughes Lawyers has extensive knowledge of employment law. Contact us and tell us about your case today.
