The Department of Justice’s (“DOJ’s”) often criticized rulemaking delays have resulted in no new website accessibility rules for places of public accommodation to receive notice of and implement. Notwithstanding the obvious due process concerns raised by these delays, more and more website accessibility cases are being threatened and filed every day. Most, not unexpectedly, settle. Winn-Dixie did not, and what happened next is worth a closer look.
Continue Reading
Accommodation
Second Circuit Denies Needlephobic Pharmacist’s Rehearing Request
By Lindsay B. Velarde & Kevin J. White on
Posted in Public Accommodations
n a previous post, we discussed the Second Circuit’s opinion finding that Rite-Aid lawfully fired a long-tenured pharmacist after he refused to comply with the company’s new mandate that pharmacists administer immunizations. The plaintiff requested that the Second Circuit rehear the case, arguing that it should consider additional evidence. …
Continue Reading
Second Circuit Says Firing Disabled Worker Was Lawful
By Lindsay B. Velarde & Roland M. Juarez on
Posted in Employment Policies, Public Accommodations
The Second Circuit recently held that Rite-Aid lawfully fired a long-tenured pharmacist after he refused to comply with the company’s new mandate that pharmacists administer immunizations. The Court’s decision overturned a jury verdict of $2.6 million in the pharmacist’s favor and reminds employers what it takes to show that a given function is “essential” and what accommodations are reasonable. …
Continue Reading
1.7 Million Reasons to Review Your Company’s Attendance and Leave Policies
By Ryan M. Bates on
This week, the EEOC announced that an Illinois-based packing company, Pactiv LLC, agreed to pay $1.7 million to resolve a charge alleging that the company discriminated against employees who needed time off from work for medical reasons. …
Continue Reading
Supreme Court Holds That Employers Can Violate Title VII’s Religious Discrimination Provisions, Even Where Applicants Have Not Disclosed Need for Accommodation
The Supreme Court recently held in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. that Title VII prohibits a prospective employer from refusing to hire an applicant in order to avoid accommodating a religious practice that it could accommodate without undue hardship, even where the applicant has not informed the employer of his need for an accommodation.…
Continue Reading
Anti-Discrimination Provisions in State Medical Marijuana Laws Raise Additional Considerations for Workplace Drug Testing
Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws which decriminalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes.…
Continue Reading
EEOC Issues Pregnancy Discrimination Guidelines Despite Pending High Court Case
In Enforcement Guidance issued last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission took the position that employers should accommodate the physical restrictions of women with normal, uncomplicated pregnancies as if those women had protected disabilities.…
Continue Reading
Telecommuting May Be A Reasonable Accommodation, Even For Jobs With “Teamwork” Requirements
By Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP on
Posted in Employment Policies, Public Accommodations
On April 22, 2014, the Sixth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of an ADA case against Ford Motor Company, finding that there was a fact issue as to whether telecommuting most days is a reasonable accommodation. In EEOC v. Ford Motor Company (No. 12-2484), the court addressed an increasingly common, yet persistently difficult, question: when must employees be allowed to work remotely, and when is physical, in-person attendance an essential function of a job?
EEOC Releases Guidance on Accommodating Religious Dress and Grooming
On March 6, 2014, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released guidance pertaining to employers’ responsibilities to accommodate religious dress and grooming in the workplace.…
Continue Reading
Tenth Circuit Overturns EEOC Win On Religious Accommodation
In a 2-1 decision, the Tenth Circuit reversed summary judgment in favor of the EEOC on its claim that Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. failed to provide an applicant with a reasonable religious accommodation and remanded the case for entry of judgment in favor of Abercrombie.