The plaintiff in this case is a deaf person who does office work for UPS. His primary language is American Sign Language (ASL). He reads and writes in English at a fourth or fifth grade level. He was able to successfully perform his job duties. However, he encountered difficulties participating in weekly workplace meetings, job training, and disciplinary meetings.

1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the court decide?

2. What things did UPS do for this employee? Why does the court nonetheless allow the employee’s failure to reasonably accommodate claim to go forward?

3. Why does UPS not argue that providing the ASL interpreter would be an undue hardship?

4. Is the issue in this case deafness or literacy? Are these connected?