ADA question...regarding employees

[Mithrandir]

I have been having a discussion elsewhere on the Interwebs about this situation:

An employee has vision problems so she cannot drive if it is dark. All the employees in her library work a night shift, but she is claiming that she can't because of not being able to drive at night. Other employees are upset at her not taking her turn. People in the discussion are saying that she is covered by ADA (reasonable accommodations) because she cannot drive at night so she should not have to work that shift.

I don't really know ADA all that well, but it seems that as long as she wasn't discriminated against in getting hired (which she obviously wasn't) and the employer makes accommodations to help her do her job (which they have), then how can she claim any legal recourse?

Surely getting to and from work lies outside the boundaries of ADA? And it is up to the individual to actually have the means to get to work?

Thanks.

[B-Fly]

No, I believe "reasonable accommodation" under ADA would include accommodating disabilities that impact her ability to get to or from a particular work location at a particular time. To the extent she can work the same number of hours as others, but cannot commute at night due to a medical disability (which disability does not appear to be in dispute here), I think the library probably would need to accommodate.

[Mithrandir]

No, I believe "reasonable accommodation" under ADA would include accommodating disabilities that impact her ability to get to or from a particular work location at a particular time. To the extent she can work the same number of hours as others, but cannot commute at night due to a medical disability (which disability does not appear to be in dispute here), I think the library probably would need to accommodate.

Thanks. Is this a good thing? Not to sound harsh, but how far should employers be required to go to accommodate people? I certainly don't want those with disabilities to be prevented from working, but where does it end?

[Steve 2.0]

Uber? Lyft? Taxi? Cab? Bus?

[madducks]

Just get her some night vision goggles.

[B-Fly]

Thanks. Is this a good thing? Not to sound harsh, but how far should employers be required to go to accommodate people? I certainly don't want those with disabilities to be prevented from working, but where does it end?

This responds to your letters to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC's) Seattle District Office and Office of General Counsel. You asked whether the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and the Washington State Law Against Discrimination contain provisions for bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) defenses.

The EEOC enforces Title I of the ADA, which prohibits employers from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability. A "qualified individual with a disability" is a person with a disability who meets all of a position's legitimate job requirements and can perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation.

As you noted, there is no BFOQ defense in the ADA. Accordingly, an employer may not defend a disability-based employment action by asserting that the absence of disability is a BFOQ. An employer, however, may assert other defenses under the ADA. For example, an employer may defend the use of a qualification standard that screens out an individual on the basis of disability by showing that the standard is job related and consistent with business necessity. In that respect, the employer must show that the standard is an accurate measure of the individual's ability to perform the essential functions of the position at issue. An employer may justify a safety-based standard by showing the existence of a direct threat, i.e., a significant risk of substantial harm that cannot be reduced or eliminated through reasonable accommodation.

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/foia/letters/2001/ada_job_related.html

It "ends" when you can show that the standard (e.g., working night shifts) is a business necessity and the ability to do it is an accurate measure of the individual's ability to perform the essential functions of the job, i.e., that there's a significant risk of substantial harm that cannot be reduced or eliminated through reasonable accommodation. I don't believe you can effectively make that case here.

[B-Fly]

Uber? Lyft? Taxi? Cab? Bus?

Not sure of the availability in Belle Vernon, PA, but if the library could arrange for the employee to be picked up from home before and dropped off after night shifts, that could potentially be viewed as a reasonable accommodation.

[Mithrandir]

This case was mentioned in the discussion today:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-3rd-circuit/1521038.html