RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT AND DISCRIMINATION LAW

ADA Requires Employers To Provide Reasonable, Not Necessarily Preferred, Accommodations The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently defined (and limited) the scope of employers' obligation under the Americans With Disabilities Act to provide reasonable accommodations. In Stewart v. Happy Herman's Cheshire Bridge, 117 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir. 1997), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that under the Americans With Disabilities Act, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees with disabilities, not necessarily employees' preferred accommodations. Plaintiff Stewart worked as a cashier in a Happy Herman's grocery store. Due to pelvic surgery, Stewart was unable to stand for long periods of time, and required frequent bathroom breaks. For six months Happy Herman's accommodated Stewart on her terms, reassigning certain of her duties to other employees; avoiding assigning her additional hours; and providing her frequent bathroom breaks. A dispute arose, however, when Happy Herman's reduced its paid lunch breaks from 30 to 15 minutes. Stewart complained, alleging that the new lunch policy caused her physical condition to deteriorate. In response, Happy Herman's offered Stewart a 20 minute lunch break; shorter shifts; and leave of absence/planned break time alternatives. Stewart did not merely reject these proposed accommodations, she demonstrated her dissatisfaction by engaging in insubordinate, disruptive behavior at work. Not surprisingly, after Happy Herman's terminated Stewart for her improper behavior, Stewart brought suit against the company under the ADA. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit rejected Stewart's ADA claim, holding that a qualified individual with a disability is "not entitled to the accommodation of her choice, but only to a reasonable accommodation." While the employer ultimately prevailed in Stewart, one wonders "at what cost?" Savy employers must not lose sight of the fact that while the ADA requires reasonable accommodations, it is often the case that only the implementation of the employee's preferred accommodation will actually prevent litigation. Obviously, in those cases in which the employee's preferred accommodation is not reasonable and/or not feasible, the employer's decision is easy. However, where an employee's preferred accommodation is both reasonable and feasible, an employer is foolish not to give such accommodation serious consideration. Preventing litigation is always better than winning litigation. .

TELEPHONE: 603-778-7300 FAX: 603-778-7373