So, that whole discussion by the EEOC on the importance of interacting with your employees who request or might need a disability before taking action?
Or the post from 2008 on the changing mindset for employers thanks to the amendments to the Americans with Disabilities Act?
We were serious. And so is the EEOC, who filed suit on behalf of an employee who was offered a job, showed up for the first day of work, and had the employment offer rescinded once a member of management noticed the employee was missing some fingers.
Showing posts with label disability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label disability. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Thursday, October 22, 2009
The EEOC recently released its proposed regulations for the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. The regulations were designed to better define the provisions of the Amendments and better refine Congress’s intent in amending the ADA. In fact, the drafters of the proposed regulations made sure that we were aware that they were charged with enacting Congress’s intent that the term “disability” be broadly construed (if they mentioned it once, they mentioned it 20 times!!).
True to their task, the EEOC has broadly defined what qualifies as a disability. In fact, the proposed regulations, at this point, do not leave much question as to whether a disability exists. The list of major life activities is so extensive that almost any ailment could substantially limit one of those activities (for instance, concentrating is now considered a major life activity – who doesn’t suffer from the occasional lapse in that!). Also of note is the change which no longer allows ameliorative mitigating factors such as medication or other devices -- except eyeglasses and contact lenses -- in determining whether an activity of daily life is affected. It also important to recognize that the proposed regulations only require an ailment to substantially limit one major life activity and it does not matter whether it limits others.
Ultimately, we wish the committee spent a little bit more time letting us know what would be considered an “undue hardship” for the employer. We know that whether an ailment is a disability will be broadly construed, but there’s just not much guidance on what to do with that. For instance, the proposed regulations specifically list epilepsy as a disability, but no guidance is given on how to accommodate the disability or what would be considered an undue hardship for an employer trying to accommodate an epileptic.
Regardless, there'll be much more to come on these regulations. Stay tuned for more!
True to their task, the EEOC has broadly defined what qualifies as a disability. In fact, the proposed regulations, at this point, do not leave much question as to whether a disability exists. The list of major life activities is so extensive that almost any ailment could substantially limit one of those activities (for instance, concentrating is now considered a major life activity – who doesn’t suffer from the occasional lapse in that!). Also of note is the change which no longer allows ameliorative mitigating factors such as medication or other devices -- except eyeglasses and contact lenses -- in determining whether an activity of daily life is affected. It also important to recognize that the proposed regulations only require an ailment to substantially limit one major life activity and it does not matter whether it limits others.
Ultimately, we wish the committee spent a little bit more time letting us know what would be considered an “undue hardship” for the employer. We know that whether an ailment is a disability will be broadly construed, but there’s just not much guidance on what to do with that. For instance, the proposed regulations specifically list epilepsy as a disability, but no guidance is given on how to accommodate the disability or what would be considered an undue hardship for an employer trying to accommodate an epileptic.
Regardless, there'll be much more to come on these regulations. Stay tuned for more!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
83A? AD3A? ADTripleA? What in the world?
Many of you would argue that your lawyer's favorite soup is alphabet, because that's the only way we know to reference laws. FMLA. ADA. FLSA. USERRA. NDAA. BINGO. (Just kidding.)
By now, you've either read or heard about GINA. It appeared that GINA was going to be the biggest piece of legislation to impact employers this year. Not quite.
On September 25, 2008, President Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, or the ADAAA. As you can see, this acronym doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. My struggle thus far, aside from the substantive aspects of the Act, is figuring out how to reference it in my speeches and presentations. I'm still working on that.
But that is not of concern to you, as you have enough to handle with the substantive impact of the ADAAA. If you haven't heard about it, please don't consider this to be the sole source of your information. Google would probably refuse to give us enough space here to write about the ins-and-outs of the Act, much less how to address its impact on you. That said, here is a quick primer on the ADAAA:
1. It directs that the definition of "disability" should be broadly construed.
2. It no longer allows you to consider mitigating measures, such as medications, hearing aids, prosthetics, etc. that might be effectively addressing the impairment. The exception to this is that contacts and glasses may be considered when an employee's vision is impaired.
3. It provides 2 non-exhaustive lists of "major life activities" to be evaluated in the "substantially limits" context. The list includes activities such as thinking, concentrating, walking, eating and working. Unfortunately, the lists are not given in any context themselves, so it remains to be seen whether someone is substantially limited in, say, working, if they are unable to perform only one specific type of job, instead of working in general.
In the legislative history of the Act, Congress is reported as saying, "The question of whether an individual's impairment is a disability under the ADA should not require an extensive analysis."
Quizzically, the same Congress who passed GINA passed the ADAAA. Why is that puzzling? Well, consider what GINA addresses. It addresses the strides made in the medical field to identify genes and their impact on certain diseases, conditions, and likelihood of developing conditions in our lifetime. The ADAAA, by eliminating from consideration mitigation measures, such as transplants, drug research and bio-mechanical developments, refuses to acknowledge those strides in the medical field.
ADAAA becomes effective January 1, 2009, although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is unsure it will have published regulations addressing "substantially limits" before the turn of the year. Thus, you should be making appropriate adjustments to your policies and conducting training with your managers, supervisors, and HR specialists to best position your company to handle the changes that await.
By now, you've either read or heard about GINA. It appeared that GINA was going to be the biggest piece of legislation to impact employers this year. Not quite.
On September 25, 2008, President Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, or the ADAAA. As you can see, this acronym doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. My struggle thus far, aside from the substantive aspects of the Act, is figuring out how to reference it in my speeches and presentations. I'm still working on that.
But that is not of concern to you, as you have enough to handle with the substantive impact of the ADAAA. If you haven't heard about it, please don't consider this to be the sole source of your information. Google would probably refuse to give us enough space here to write about the ins-and-outs of the Act, much less how to address its impact on you. That said, here is a quick primer on the ADAAA:
1. It directs that the definition of "disability" should be broadly construed.
2. It no longer allows you to consider mitigating measures, such as medications, hearing aids, prosthetics, etc. that might be effectively addressing the impairment. The exception to this is that contacts and glasses may be considered when an employee's vision is impaired.
3. It provides 2 non-exhaustive lists of "major life activities" to be evaluated in the "substantially limits" context. The list includes activities such as thinking, concentrating, walking, eating and working. Unfortunately, the lists are not given in any context themselves, so it remains to be seen whether someone is substantially limited in, say, working, if they are unable to perform only one specific type of job, instead of working in general.
In the legislative history of the Act, Congress is reported as saying, "The question of whether an individual's impairment is a disability under the ADA should not require an extensive analysis."
Quizzically, the same Congress who passed GINA passed the ADAAA. Why is that puzzling? Well, consider what GINA addresses. It addresses the strides made in the medical field to identify genes and their impact on certain diseases, conditions, and likelihood of developing conditions in our lifetime. The ADAAA, by eliminating from consideration mitigation measures, such as transplants, drug research and bio-mechanical developments, refuses to acknowledge those strides in the medical field.
ADAAA becomes effective January 1, 2009, although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is unsure it will have published regulations addressing "substantially limits" before the turn of the year. Thus, you should be making appropriate adjustments to your policies and conducting training with your managers, supervisors, and HR specialists to best position your company to handle the changes that await.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)