The Integrity News
Vol. XI No. 1
ISSN 1081-2717
January 8, 2002
FOX News
"After a Supreme Court ruling today, it will now be more difficult for
a person with a partial disability to demand special treatment at work."
"The Supreme Court on Tuesday narrowed the scope
of the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), ruling
that car manufacturer Toyota was not obligated to
tailor an assembly line worker's job to suit her wrist,
arm and shoulder problems associated with carpal
tunnel syndrome.
The law guarantees equal treatment on the job and
elsewhere for people whose disabilities "substantially
limit" their ability to perform what the law calls
"major life activities," such as caring for oneself.
Ella Williams' disability did not prevent her from doing
many tasks at home and at work. But a federal appeals
court found that she was disabled under the ADA
because her physical problems substantially limited her
ability to perform manual tasks at work.
"This was error," the Supreme Court noted in an
opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
In cases like Williams', "the central inquiry must be
whether the claimant is unable to perform the variety
of tasks central to most people's daily lives, not whether
the claimant is unable to perform the tasks associated
with her specific job," the court wrote.
Disability cannot be assessed by looking only at
someone's fitness to work, the court said.
The court reversed the opinion of the Cincinnati-based
6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and sent the Williams
case back with instructions to reconsider it.
The ruling does not mean that anyone with carpal tunnel
syndrome or similar partial disabilities is automatically
excluded from protection by the ADA. But it probably
will make such claims harder to prove, since the court
makes clear that disability must affect a range of manual
tasks or duties.
Williams and advocates for the disabled had argued that
her case was emblematic of just the kind of discrimination
the ADA was supposed to prevent.
A partially disabled person who wants to work should be
able to do so, with modest accommodation by an employer,
rather than being forced to sit home, her lawyers have
argued.
Williams claimed that her work on a Toyota engine
assembly line so damaged her hands and arms that she
has trouble brushing her hair and buckling her shoes.
Her doctor said she cannot lift more than 20 pounds,
repeatedly flex her wrists and elbows or keep her arms
extended at shoulder height for long periods.
Williams' problems began within months of taking a job
at the Georgetown, Ky., manufacturing plant in 1990,
she claimed.
At oral argument in November, the justices focused on
how employers and courts should classify people who
may be unable to do some tasks, but are perfectly capable
of doing others.
"Don't you have to look at both what they can do and
what they can't do?" O'Connor asked Williams' lawyer
then.
Toyota did try to accommodate Williams for a time, with
a job inspecting paint, but that truce broke down when
the company required her to swab cars with an oil that
highlighted paint flaws. The task, which involved keeping
her arms extended, aggravated her symptoms, Williams
said.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business
groups backed Toyota. Several civil rights, legal and
labor interests supported Williams.
The case is Toyota v. Williams, 00-1089."
|
|
