Supreme Court Limits Disability Law
WASHINGTON — 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, 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.
foxnews.com |
