This exercise is designed to help you understand (1) the application of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the court's interpretation of the ADA, and the meaning of the terms, "disability", "qualified individual'", and "reasonable accommodation."

Online, find, review, and become acquainted the Americans with Disabilities Act's definitions of "disability", "qualified individual'", and "reasonable accommodation."

Assignment:

Read each of the case incidents below and select 3 to review and respond to the following questions:

1. 1. What issue(s) must the court decide in this case?
   2. If you were a member of the jury, how would you vote?
   3. Did the employer discriminate unlawfully? Why or why not?

Please cite the sources used to determine each of your answers.

Incident 1 - The Overweight Hospital Attendant

Betty Thomas applied for a position as an attendant for the intellectually disabled in a residential facility operated by the Mental Health Retardation Hospital (MHRH). She had previously worked for MHRH in an identical position. She has an excellent work record and left employment with MHRH on good terms. When Thomas reapplied for the position she previously held, she stood 5 feet 2 inches tall and weighed 320 pounds. During her pre-employment physical, it was determined that although Thomas was morbidly obese, no limitations were found that affected her ability to do the job, MHRH refused to hire Thomas because of her obesity, claiming that her weight compromised her ability to evacuate patients in the event of an emergency and put Thomas at greater risk of developing serious ailments that might lead to higher absenteeism, as well as increasing MHRH's exposure to workers' compensation claims.

Incident 2 - Is Attendance at the Workplace an Essential Job Function?

In 1996, Diane worked in the Edmond, Oklahoma Post Office and witnessed the murder of several of her coworkers. She was diagnosed by her doctor with post-traumatic stress disorder and subsequently left her job at the Post Office because working there aggravated her symptoms. In March 2009, while working as a service coordinator at Avaya Communications, Diane became aware of an altercation between two employees where one of the individuals, by the name of Lunsford, had previously threatened to "go postal." Lunsford was suspended from this job. Upon hearing of his return to work, Diane became physically ill and left work. Her current doctors confirmed that she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and was unable to work in an environment that she perceived to be unsafe. She eventually was placed on short-term disability leave. After being on short-term disability for two months, Diane requested that her employer either (1) relocate Lunsford, (2) allow her to work out of her home, or (3) allow her to transfer to another position in the Oklahoma City area. After further investigation by the employer, Diane's requested accommodations were denied. One year later, her request for long-term disability benefits was also denied, and Diane was subsequently discharged because she was unable to return to work. The company maintained that Diane's job required her to be physically present and that her attendance at the job site was essential function of her job. While her job description did not specifically state that attendance at the work site was an essential function, the company claimed that her presence was required for the appropriate supervision, training, and teamwork required of all coordinators, and that her requested accommodations were not reasonable.

Incident 3 - The Ultimatum

Joan, a warehouse worker, was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. She was subsequently assigned to reduced duties. However, the duties were later multiplied, increasing her arm and wrist pain. When Joan presented her employer with a doctor's note advising her to take a six-week leave of absence, the employer gave her an ultimatum - show up for work or lose her job. Joan decided to sue under the ADA, claiming her carpal tunnel syndrome was a disability worthy of accommodation.

Incident 4 - The Fainting Technician

Jane Flighty was fired after she fainted on the job because the company believed she was suffering from an unknown disability. After the fainting episode, she was sent to a physician. The physician's initial diagnosis was that Jane suffered from syncope, a loss of consciousness caused by a temporary deficiency of blood supply to the brain. Later, the physician determined that the employee was within normal limits and that there was no explanation for the fainting. The company discharged Jane without a further medical examination, concluding that she was a safety risk because she was likely to faint again.

Incident 5 - The Gun Slinger

John Hitman was fired when he was caught carrying a gun into work. He was hospitalized following the incident and was diagnosed with a mental disorder. HIs attorney informed the company of his mental status and asked that they delay any decision about his employment status. The company fired John for his clear violation of company rules.

PLEASE HELP ME