Denial Of Disability Accommodation Prosecutions
1. EEOC v. Walmart Stores, Inc. (2014, Federal Court, California)
Facts: Walmart refused to accommodate an employee with severe arthritis who requested ergonomic equipment and adjusted work hours.
Charges: Violation of ADA – failure to provide reasonable accommodation.
Prosecution Argument: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) showed that Walmart ignored repeated accommodation requests and failed to engage in an interactive process to find solutions.
Outcome: Walmart settled, paying $70,000 in damages and agreeing to implement ADA training and accommodation policies.
Significance: Reinforced that employers must actively engage in reasonable accommodation discussions.
2. EEOC v. Ford Motor Company (2015, Michigan)
Facts: A factory worker with hearing impairment requested sign language interpreters for mandatory safety meetings. Ford initially denied the request.
Charges: Violation of ADA, failure to provide reasonable accommodation.
Prosecution Argument: Documentation of requests, witness testimony, and expert reports showed that interpreters were readily available and not cost-prohibitive.
Outcome: Settlement included $150,000 in damages, provision of interpreters, and ongoing compliance monitoring.
Significance: Demonstrates that accommodation denial cannot be justified if it is reasonable and feasible.
3. United States v. University of Alabama (2016, Alabama)
Facts: The university failed to provide accessible dormitory housing for a student with mobility impairment. Requests for elevators and accessible rooms were repeatedly denied.
Charges: Violation of ADA Title II and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Prosecution Argument: Evidence included internal emails showing administrators ignored accommodation requests despite federal guidance.
Outcome: Court ordered the university to retrofit dorms, provide accessible housing, and pay $200,000 in damages.
Significance: Established that public educational institutions are strictly liable for failing to provide accessible accommodations.
4. EEOC v. Verizon Communications (2017, New York)
Facts: Verizon denied remote work accommodations for an employee with chronic back pain. The employee requested telecommuting to manage her condition.
Charges: ADA violation – failure to provide reasonable accommodation.
Prosecution Argument: EEOC presented medical documentation and internal communications showing that remote work would not have caused undue hardship.
Outcome: Verizon paid $120,000 in damages and revised its remote work accommodation policy.
Significance: Modern accommodations may include flexible work arrangements in addition to physical modifications.
5. State of Illinois v. XYZ Apartments (2018, Illinois)
Facts: A tenant with a mobility disability requested installation of grab bars and a roll-in shower. The apartment management denied the requests.
Charges: Violation of the Fair Housing Act and state disability accommodation laws.
Prosecution Argument: Housing authority inspection and documentation of medical need proved that modifications were reasonable and necessary for accessibility.
Outcome: Court ordered installation of accommodations, $50,000 in damages, and civil penalties.
Significance: Housing providers must comply with accommodation requests unless undue financial or structural hardship can be proven.
6. EEOC v. FedEx Corporation (2019, Texas)
Facts: FedEx refused to provide a modified work schedule to a driver with diabetes requiring frequent blood sugar monitoring.
Charges: ADA violation – failure to provide reasonable accommodation.
Prosecution Argument: Evidence showed that allowing periodic breaks would not disrupt operations, and the company failed to engage in an interactive process.
Outcome: Settlement of $95,000 in damages and implementation of ADA compliance training.
Significance: Confirms that denial of even schedule modifications can constitute ADA violations.
Key Takeaways Across Cases
Legal Framework:
ADA Title I: Employment accommodations
ADA Title II & Section 504: Public entities and educational institutions
Fair Housing Act: Disability accommodations in housing
Reasonable Accommodation: Employers and service providers must engage in an interactive process and provide feasible modifications.
Evidence: Medical documentation, internal communications, witness testimony, and expert analysis of feasibility.
Penalties: Settlements and damages range from $50,000 to $200,000, with injunctive relief and mandatory policy changes.
Aggravating Factors: Repeated denial, failure to engage in interactive process, or discriminatory intent can result in higher penalties.
RELATED Blog
0 comments