Trainings & Events Calendar
In this webinar, project team members from DOJ and 18F will review their collaborative efforts to improve the functionality of the external user interface and the data collected and increase analysis and response efficiency. The enhanced site models accessibility for persons with disabilities, and the team continues to ensure that new features are vetted for accessibility.
News from the Federal Agencies
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
The U.S. Access Board has released a summary report on its four-part series of virtual meetings on making autonomous vehicles (AVs) accessible to passengers with disabilities. The sessions featured presentations by invited speakers who shared information and research results on design considerations and solutions for making AVs accessible to passengers with mobility, sensory, or cognitive disabilities. They also provided an opportunity for members of the public to pose questions and to share information and ideas during the session or through an online discussion platform.
Star Cases / Zero Manufacturing to Pay $27,500 to Resolve EEOC Discrimination Charge
A North Salt Lake-based manufacturing company will pay $27,500 to resolve a disability discrimination charge filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),. The EEOC’s investigation revealed that a qualified individual with a disability was denied reasonable accommodations to perform her job. The reasonable accommodation was in the form of leave.
EEOC Sues Arizona Subway Franchise for Disability Discrimination
RCC Partners, LLC, doing business as Subway 701 in Buckeye, Arizona, violated federal law when it failed to accommodate an employee with autism and ADHD and then fired because he had a disability and/or need for accommodation, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed.
Professional Transportation, Inc. to Pay $60,000 to Settle EEOC Suit
According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC's) lawsuit, in February 2019, a job applicant recovering from opioid addiction sought a position as a van driver at the Professional Transportation, Inc.'s (PTI's) Bluefield, W.V., branch, and PTI subsequently made a conditional job offer to her. However, PTI later rescinded its offer after the job applicant informed the company that she was receiving Suboxone treatment, the EEOC said. A PTI human resources official reviewed information about the possible safety related side effects of Suboxone and then disqualified the job applicant based on her Suboxone treatment without considering whether she actually experiences any side effects from the medication.
EEOC Sues Agropur for Disability Discrimination
Agropur, Inc., a diary processor and U.S. subsidiary of Canadian-based Agropur Cooperative, has been sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for failing to provide a disabled employee with a reasonable accommodation, which resulted in her discharge. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Agropur refused to accommodate the employee’s severe dyshidrotic eczema, a skin condition.
EEOC Sues JDKD Enterprises for Disability Discrimination
JDKD Enterprises, LP, a Sewell-New Jersey limited partnership that owns and operates numerous McDonald’s franchises in New Jersey, violated federal law when it fired a grill cook due to his disability, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it announced.
According to the suit, a grill cook who has autism spectrum disorder worked at McDonald’s for 37 years, including for about ten years at a McDonald’s restaurant in Deptford, New Jersey. Throughout his employment, the grill cook received awards and accolades for his excellent job performance. The grill cook’s disability was apparent, and it included his tendency to speak in a loud voice. The EEOC charges that only two months after JDKD Enterprises assumed ownership of this McDonald’s restaurant in Deptford, it abruptly terminated the grill cook because of his disability, despite his continued excellent job performance.
Dragon Rig / The Modern Group Sued by EEOC for Disability Discrimination
Industrial equipment and services companies The Modern Group, Ltd. and Beaumont, Texas-based Dragon Rig Sales and Service, LLC violated federal law when Dragon Rig refused to hire a job applicant because of his use of prescription medication to treat his anxiety and opioid addiction disabilities, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed.
After assessing his qualifications and work experience, Dragon Rig offered the applicant a job conditioned on his passing a pre-employment drug test, the EEOC said. The applicant provided the drug testing facility copies of his prescriptions and he passed the drug test. Nevertheless, the facility’s medical review officer informed Dragon Rig of the applicant’s medication use and stated that the medication could impair his ability to perform the job and operate equipment safely. The EEOC reported that without conducting any further inquiry, discussion, or assessment of the applicant’s ability to perform the job, the defendant companies withdrew the employment offer. Dragon Rig’s operations manager told the applicant “If you get off that s***, I’ll hire you,” the EEOC said.
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
Settlement Agreement between the United States and Brown University
The Justice Department entered into a settlement agreement with Brown University to resolve an investigation conducted under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under the agreement, Brown will make changes to its undergraduate leave policies and practices to provide students with mental health disabilities equal access to Brown’s educational programs, reasonably modify its policies for undergraduate students with mental health disabilities seeking to return from medical leave, train faculty and staff on the ADA, and pay $684,000 to compensate aggrieved students.
The Justice Department entered into a settlement agreement with the County of Hawai‘i and the County’s Mass Transit Agency (MTA) to resolve an investigation conducted under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Under the agreement, the County and MTA must make their transit services, including Hele-On, the buses used by the majority of riders, accessible to passengers with disabilities. The agreement requires the County and MTA to ensure that passengers with disabilities have lifts to board buses; paratransit users are provided timely pick-ups and drop-offs; and bus stops are accessible. In addition, the County and MTA must ensure that transit system drivers undergo ADA training and that disability-related complaints are addressed fairly. The County and MTA also must report to the department regarding their compliance with these requirements.
The Justice Department filed a Statement of Interest clarifying that Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires that public accommodations provide auxiliary aids and services so that individuals with disabilities can fully and equally enjoy all of their services, including services provided through visual and electronic means on self-service kiosks. The Statement of Interest was filed in the Julian Vargas and American Council of the Blind v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc. et al. lawsuit in the Central District of California. Defendants provide health care and diagnostic testing services at over 2,100 patient services centers. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants require patients to use an electronic, self-service kiosk to check in, input personal information, choose where to wait, and perform other tasks. No staff are allegedly present in the check-in area, so patients with vision impairments must ask strangers for assistance or bring companions. The Statement of Interest explains that Title III prohibits public accommodations from denying individuals with disabilities the full and equal enjoyment of their services, including services provided through visual and electronic means, because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services.
The Department of Justice announced that Hampton Corporation Inc. and several related individuals and entities have agreed to settle a federal lawsuit alleging that they violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to design and construct apartment complexes and a rental office in North Dakota so they are accessible to people with disabilities. The Department of Justice previously resolved claims against the architect and engineer involved in the design of one of the four apartment complexes at issue in the lawsuit.
In Focus
October National Disability Employment Awareness Month: “America's Recovery: Powered by Inclusion"
Held each October, the annual commemoration raises awareness about disability employment issues, and celebrates the many and varied contributions of America's workers with disabilities.
“America’s Recovery: Powered by Inclusion” is a theme that reflects our commitment to an inclusive recovery, one in which those of us with disabilities have full access to economic opportunity and – if needed – the accommodations and supports that allow us to contribute our skills and talents,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Disability Employment Policy Jennifer Sheehy.
The history of National Disability Employment Awareness Month can be traced back to 1945 when Congress declared the first week of October to be “National Employ the Physically Handicapped Week.” “Physically” was dropped in 1962 to include people with all types of disabilities. In 1988, Congress made the commemoration a month-long event.
Resources
2021 Poster | U.S. Department of Labor
Ideas for Employers and Employees
Ideas for Educators and Youth Service Professionals
Ideas for State Governors, Legislators, and Other Policymakers
Ideas for Associations and Unions
Ideas for Disability-Related Organizations
The Docket
ADA Title III Federal Mid-Year Lawsuit Numbers at an All-Time High
Kristina Launey, Minh Vu
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
co-author: Susan Ryan
Synopsis: ADA Title III lawsuit filings in federal courts on pace for a record year.
Regular readers will doubtless recall that 2020 was a down year (but just barely) for lawsuits filed in federal court alleging violations of Title III of the ADA. Our mid-year total was 4,751, due to lockdowns in April and May. That was the lowest mid-year number we’d seen since 2017.
But filings picked up in the second half of 2020, and they’ve continued to rise in 2021. In March 2021, we saw 1,240 filings—the most ever in one month. Our total for January 2021 through June 2021 is 6,304, which puts us on track to see 12,000 filings this year. Now, if 2020 taught us anything, it’s that you shouldn’t count your chickens (or your ADA Title III filings) before they’re hatched (or filed). There could be a big downturn ahead. But that’s where we are right now.
[Total Number of ADA Title III Federal Lawsuits Filed Each Year January 1, 2013-June 30, 2021: 2013: 2,722; 2014: 4,436, 63% increase over 2013; 2015: 4,789, 8% increase over 2014; 2016: 6,601, 38% increase over 2015; 2017: 7,663, 16% increase over 2016; 2018: 10,163, 33% increase over 2017; 2019: 11,053, 9% increase over 2018; 2020: 10,982, 1% decrease from 2019; 2021: 6,304 as of 6/30/21]
These numbers include Title III lawsuits filed on all grounds — physical facilities, websites and mobile applications, service animals, sign language interpreters, mask-wearing requirements, hotel reservations websites, and more. These numbers do not include the significant number of disability access lawsuits filed in state courts which are more difficult to accurately track or demand letters that never result in a lawsuit.
In what will come as a surprise to no one, California led the pack with 3,340 filings, followed by New York (1,423) and Florida (609). Again, no surprises there. Coming in at #4 was Texas (179) and Nevada (122) rounds out the top 5 states.
[Top 10 States with Federal ADA Title III Lawsuits Filed January 1, 2021-June 30, 2021: California: 3,340; New York: 1,423; Florida: 609; Texas: 179; Nevada: 122; Georgia: 85; Pennsylvania: 81; Illinois: 61; Tennessee: 51; Washington: 49]
It’s probably not useful to compare 2021 to 2020, as that was such an aberrant year (in so many ways), so let’s have a look at 2021 as compared to 2019 for the top five states.
[Federal ADA Title III Lawsuits Filed Mid-Year in Top Five States 2019 Compared to 2021: California: 2019 Mid-Year: 2,444, 2021 Mid-Year: 3,340; New York: 2019 Mid-Year: 1,212, 2021 Mid-Year: 1,423; Florida: 2019 Mid-Year: 1,074, 2021 Mid-Year: 609; Texas: 2019 Mid-Year: 128, 2021 Mid-Year: 179; Nevada: 2019 Mid-Year: 126, 2021 Mid-Year: 122]
Total filings were up 11.2% from 2019 to 2021. California filings were up 26.8% from 2019 to 2021. New York filings were up 14.8%. Bucking the trend, Florida lawsuits were down significantly from 2019 to 2021—a 43.2% drop.
What kinds of cases are responsible for the dramatic change in these states? While we have not analyzed the data, one law firm in southern California filed over five hundred lawsuits about hotel reservations websites allegedly not providing sufficient disclosures about accessibility features in hotels starting in the fall of 2020 and continuing into 2021. While many of these started in state court, most were removed to federal court. We also continue to see lawsuits about physical access barriers and website accessibility.
What will the final tally be for 2021? We predict a new record will be set and the number of lawsuits will exceed 12,000.
Our Methodology: Our overall ADA Title III lawsuit numbers come from the federal court’s docketing system, PACER. However, because the area of law code that covers ADA Title III cases also includes ADA Title II cases, our research department reviews the complaints to remove those cases from the count.
Question
Q. May an employer require all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19 under the ADA, and other federal employment nondiscrimination laws?
A. The federal EEO laws do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19, subject to the reasonable accommodation provisions of Title VII and the ADA and other EEO considerations . These principles apply if an employee gets the vaccine in the community or from the employer.
In some circumstances, Title VII and the ADA require an employer to provide reasonable accommodations for employees who, because of a disability or a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance, do not get vaccinated for COVID-19, unless providing an accommodation would pose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business. The analysis for undue hardship depends on whether the accommodation is for a disability (including pregnancy-related conditions that constitute a disability) (see K.6) or for religion (see K.12).
In some circumstances, the ADA may require an employer to provide a reasonable accommodations for employees who, because of a disability do not get vaccinated for COVID-19, unless providing an accommodation would pose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business.
An employee who does not get vaccinated due to a disability may be entitled to a reasonable accommodation that does not pose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business. For example, as a reasonable accommodation, an unvaccinated employee entering the workplace might wear a face mask, work at a social distance from coworkers or non-employees, work a modified shift, get periodic tests for COVID-19, be given the opportunity to telework, or finally, accept a reassignment.
Resources
What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws