The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (โEEOCโ) has filed suit against Coca-Cola Bottling Company United (โCCBCUโ), alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (โADAโ). The complaint accuses CCBCU of unlawfully refusing to accommodate an employee with a disability and terminating them instead of providing a reasonable adjustment. Miller Shah LLP represents employees across the country in disability discrimination matters, including ADA enforcement actions aimed at promoting workplace equality.
According to the EEOC lawsuit, the employee worked as a delivery driver in Louisiana and was diagnosed with renal disease, which required dialysis for treatment. When he asked CCBCU for a change in his work schedule to accommodate his dialysis, CCBCU allegedly told the driver he could not work on a different schedule and told the employee to apply and compete for other jobs in the company that better aligned with his medical needs.
The employee identified and applied for a job with a schedule allowing him to continue dialysis while working full time. But even though he was qualified for the role, CCBCU refused to place him in the position and later terminated him in August 2022.
The ADA is a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. The ADA guarantees that people with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else to enjoy employment. Employers must provide people with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from recruitment, hiring, promotions. training, pay, and social activities available to other employees.
The definition of disability under the ADA is construed broadly, in an effort to maximize the statuteโs applicability. An individual may be covered under the ADA if he or she has a physical or mental condition that substantially limits a major life activity, has a history of a disability, or is subject to an adverse employment action because of a physical or mental impairment that the individual actually has or is perceived to have.
To invoke the ADAโs protections, an individual with a disability must still be qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation. In other words, if an individual has a disability, but there is no reasonable accommodation that allows him or her to perform the essential functions of the job, that person is not covered by the ADA.
When job applicants or employees request job modifications pursuant to their disability, the ADA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees or job applicants, unless doing so imposes an undue hardship. The EEOC advises that reasonable accommodations should not be viewed as special treatment, as they level the playing field for people with a disability. Moreover, reasonable accommodations often benefit all employees.
Some examples of reasonable accommodations include making facilities accessible, restructuring job responsibilities, modifying work schedules, and providing accessibility functions to presentations and electronics. An accommodation is reasonable if it enables a qualified individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of a job.
An employer doesnโt have to provide accommodation if doing so would cause undue hardship to the business. Undue hardship means that the accommodation would be too difficult or too expensive to provide, considering the employerโs size, financial resources, and the needs of the business. However, an employer may not refuse to provide accommodation simply because it involves some costs. Employers have a duty to consider if other funding is available, or if costs can be offset by state or federal tax credits or deductions.
The Covid-19 pandemic had significant effects on the ADA, both in terms of understanding disability and reasonable accommodations. For instance, in 2021, the ADA released guidance on when โLong COVIDโ may be a disability under the ADA. The EEOC also released updated guidance on how the ADA applies to job applicants and employees that may need a modification of Covid-19 safety requirements or reasonable accommodations in the form of remote work. The EEOC has continued to enforce the ADAโs reasonable accommodations provision in the world of digitalization and remote work.
In 2023, the EEOC released guidance surrounding individuals with visual and/or hearing disabilities and how employers should look to technological tools to provide reasonable accommodations. These updates make clear that the EEOC is expecting employers and employees to make use of new technology to provide reasonable accommodations for a workerโs specific needs.
The ADA provides for a variety of possible remedies when employment discrimination is found. The goal of the law is to put the victim of discrimination in the same position that he or she would have been in if the discrimination had never occurred. This can involve reinstating an employeeโs position, awarding the employee back pay and benefits, and recovering attorneysโ fees and court costs associated with the case. Additionally, courts can award monetary damages to victims for any emotional harm suffered or punish an employer who has committed discrimination in an especially malicious or reckless manner.
While Miller Shah LLP is not involved in the EEOCโs lawsuit against CCBCU, the Firm regularly represents employees in discrimination and workplace accommodations cases. Miller Shah has extensive experience in individual and class action lawsuits alleging wrongful termination, harassment, and retaliation against victims of disability discrimination.
Our labor and employment attorneys are well-versed in the applicable federal and state laws that protect workersโ rights, including the ADA, as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Equal Pay Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
For information about your rights or how Miller Shah can represent you in employment litigation, contact us online or call 866-540-5505.
Disclaimer:The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Miller Shah LLP is not involved in the cases discussed, and any commentary is solely based on publicly available information.
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505
FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505
CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA San Diego | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
CA San Diego | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505
NJ Hoboken | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
IT Milan | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
NY New York City | 866-540-5505
CT Chester | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA San Diego | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505
CA Los Angeles | 310-203-0600