How Employers Routinely Violate The ADA: By Firing Employees They Regard As Disabled

A common employment law myth, our wrongful termination lawyers in Marion County, Florida have learned, is that employees must have an actual disability in order to be protected from disability discrimination under employment discrimination law. An employment law myth that employers routinely exploit without legal consequences by terminating employees who do not have an actual disability but are nonetheless regarded by employers as having a disability. Because of this employment law myth, our wrongful termination attorneys in Marion County, Florida have learned, employees who do not have an actual disability are often unaware that their employee rights have been violated when they are fired because an employer regarded them as having a disability.

In most cases, the issue of whether an employer regards an employee as disabled in violation of employment discrimination law arises when the employer believes that an employee cannot perform the job or cannot perform the job safely because of a health condition or physical impairment. Because of this belief, the employer terminates the employee. For example, an employer fires an employee because the employer believes the employee is a safety risk due to a health condition or physical impairment. In the “regarded as” disabled context, the employer’s belief is mistaken because the employee does not have an actual disability and can perform the job or perform the job safely without an accommodation.

In this article, our wrongful termination lawyers in Marion County, Florida explain how the decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Staffmark Investment, LLC and Sony Electronics, Inc., 67 F.Supp.3d 885 (N.D. Ill. 2014) shows that when an employer believes an employee is unable to perform the job or cannot perform the job safely because of a health condition or physical impairment, the employer regards the employee as disabled within the meaning of employment discrimination law.

Employment Discrimination Lawsuit

In that case, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought an employment discrimination lawsuit on behalf of a former employee, a woman named Shanks, of Staffmark Investment, LLC (“Staffmark”) and Sony Electronics, Inc. (“Sony”), pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The ADA protects employees from discrimination on the basis of disability. For purposes of the ADA, employees are protected from disability discrimination when they have an actual disability or when an employer regards them as having a disability. Under the ADA, therefore, employees are protected from disability discrimination even when an employer regards them as having a disability even though they do not, in fact, have a disability.

The EEOC is the federal agency charged with enforcing and interpreting federal employment discrimination law, including the ADA. The EEOC is also authorized by federal law to bring employment discrimination lawsuits on behalf of employees. The EEOC alleges that Staffmark and Sony violated the ADA by terminating Shanks’ employment on the basis of disability. More specifically, the EEOC claims that Staffmark and Sony unlawfully fired Shanks in violation of the ADA because they regarded her as disabled.

Employee Might Get Hurt

Shanks, as a result of an amputation of her right leg in 2008, suffers a walking impairment and has used a prosthetic leg. In May 2010, Shanks applied for a temporary job through Staffmark, a staffing agency. On October 8, 2010, a Staffmark recruiter called Shanks with a temporary job opportunity at Sony and notified her that she would be performing work on Sony televisions. The work involved manually checking individual television sets for stripped screws.

On October 9, 2010, Shanks reported to work at Sony’s. Shanks was part of a team of six and was assigned to check screws. With a six-person team, two people were assigned to check screws, one on each side of the television while the television was on a table. Shanks performed her job without walking around the table. Late in the afternoon that same day, a Sony employee spoke with a Staffmark employee, Scott, and requested Shanks’ removal from the job assignment. Scott and another Staffmark employee, Mota, walked over to Shanks’ table and informed her that she was being removed from the Sony job assignment because of concerns that she would be bumped into or knocked down by someone. Shanks then said that she was fine and could perform the job. Shanks testified that Mota told her that Staffmark would find her another job where she could sit down and not get hurt.

The degree of Shanks’ walking impairment was disputed by the parties. Shanks’ doctor testified that Shanks was not able to stand for eight hours without the use of a cane in October 2010 but could “take up a more active job” if she could use a “cane for supported and intermittent rest breaks.” Shanks testified that she was able to stand for eight or more hours, but nonetheless, was not required to stand for eight hours without interruption at her job.

Fired Employee Regarded As Disabled

Shanks reached a settlement with Staffmark. Sony, however, filed a motion with the trial court seeking dismissal of Shanks’ disability discrimination claim. As Shanks never informed a Sony employee that she was an amputee, Shanks could not proceed under an actual disability theory of liability. To prevail under an actual disability theory of liability, Shanks would have to show that Sony had knowledge of her actual disability. Without such evidence of Sony’s knowledge, Shanks could not prove that she was fired because of an actual disability. Thus, the threshold issue on Sony’s motion for dismissal was whether Sony regarded Shanks as disabled.

In resolving this issue, the trial court explained that “an employer that believes an employee is unable to perform the job safely or that an employee’s impairment is insufficiently controlled regards that employee as disabled.” In applying this principle, the trial court found that there was sufficient evidence to establish that Sony regarded Shanks as disabled because Shanks “was released from Sony project employment due to concerns regarding her being bumped into or knocked down by someone.” The trial court also observed that even though Shanks never told any Sony employee that she was an amputee or had no evidence that any Sony employee knew she was amputee, two Sony employees “noticed that Shanks walked in an irregular manner, stating that she walked with a ‘waddle’ and by ‘swaying back and forth.’ ” Based on this evidence, the trial court determined that “a reasonable jury could conclude that Sony regarded [Shanks] as disabled” and, as a result, denied Sony’s motion for dismissal.

Marion County Wrongful Discharge Lawyers

Based in Ocala, Florida and representing workers throughout Florida, our wrongful termination lawyers in Marion County, Florida fought for the rights of wrongful termination victims for more than two decades. If you have been wrongfully fired or have questions about your rights as a wrongful termination victim, please contact our office for a free consultation with our wrongful termination lawyers in Marion County, Florida. Our employee rights law firm takes wrongful termination cases on a contingency fee basis. This means that there are no attorney’s fees incurred unless there is a recovery and our attorney’s fees come solely from the monetary award that you recover.