This story appears in the
December 2002 issue of
Entrepreneur.
Subscribe »
When Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA),
it left a lot open to interpretation. And interpret it is just what
the Supreme Court has done.
The court handed down four decisions regarding the ADA this
year. Two rulings-Barnes v. Gorman and U.S. Airways v.
Barnett-apply to state and local governments and unionized
employers, respectively. In Toyota v. Williams, the court further
defined disability by finding that an individual seeking ADA
coverage-in this case, for carpal tunnel syndrome-must show the
impairment substantially limits everyday activities. In Chevron v.
Eschazbal, the court ruled that a company may refuse to hire a
person with a disability if the job could worsen the condition.
"In Chevron, the court made a statement that companies
shouldn't have to risk violating OSHA," says Condon A.
McGlothlen, partner and chair of the ADA taskforce at law firm
Seyfarth Shaw in Chicago. "It's not a green light to [use]
screening devices, but it gives employers breathing room."
Stay the course, advises Richard J. Reibstein, a partner in the
Employment Practices Services at law firm Wolf, Block, Schorr and
Solis-Cohen LLP in New York City. Overall, he predicts, these
decisions will have little effect, because as a small employer, you
have to contend with state and local laws that can be more
protective of employees.
Continue to do your best to accommodate the disabled, Reibstein
says. Document all reasonable accommodation discussions, and be
clear about job requirements. "Don't change
anything," he says. "There's more than one layer of
regulation."
Contact Sources