On May 15, 2013, the EEOC issued a press release announcing revised publications regarding employment rights for four categories of individuals with specific disabilities. The publications address how the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to applicants and employees with cancer, diabetes, epilepsy, and intellectual disabilities.
A federal appellate court in the Midwest issued a decision this week that may provide a false sense of security to California employers regarding the extent of their obligation to accommodate disabled employees. See Basden v. Professional Transportation, Inc., Case No. 11-2880 (7th Cir. May 8, 2013).
On December 17, 2012, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Jankey v. Lee. The Court ruled that prevailing defendants in disability access cases brought under both the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and California Civil Code section 55 are entitled to their attorney’s fees just like prevailing plaintiffs are. The issue was vehemently disputed between that segment of the plaintiff’s bar that specializes in “shake-down” disability access lawsuits, and the California business community.
What do you think of when you think about St. Patrick’s Day? Corn Beef, Cabbage, Green Beer, John Wayne’s greatest movie “The Quiet Man”, new governmental regulations for bars and restaurants? WHAT!?!
Continue Reading Just InTime For St. Patrick’s Day: New ADA Bar Accessibility Requirements Went Into Effect Thursday
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) thinks so. The EEOC recently posted a letter to its website stating that it may be unlawful for employers to require a job applicant to have obtained a high school diploma if the applicant suffers from a learning disability and has been unable to obtain one. The EEOC’s position represents a significant departure from traditional interpretation by the courts with regard to matters of unintentional discrimination resulting in a disparate impact on certain groups.