Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: EEOC v. WalMart (Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

 

As with many labor & employment law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


A recent case out of the Seventh Circuit caught my eye as it turns on whether WalMart provided a reasonable accommodation to a disabled employee.  In the case, Paul Reina (“Reina”), worked at WalMart as a cart attendant but was limited due to his severe cognitive delay and legal blindness.  While Reina could physically push carts, he could not steer them.  As well, he was unable to attend to motorized carts and could not response to basic customer service questions.  WalMart chose to hire a job coach for Reina who helped Reina steer the carts, operate the motorized carts, and answer customer questions.

Following a new manager being hired, it was determined that the job coach assisting Reina should no longer continue.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) subsequently sued WalMart and alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).  The case went to a jury in 2019 in which the jury found WalMart in violation of the ADA.

WalMart subsequently appealed the jury’s verdict on the grounds that Reina was not a “qualified individual” under the ADA.  WalMart argued that its decision to accommodate Reina beyond what the ADA required should not be held against them.  In this case, WalMart noted that if another employee came to them and said they could not steer carts, operate motorized carts, or answer customer questions, “no one would claim that the ADA would require WalMart to hire and allow a job coach to perform these essential job functions for [the employee].”

It is worth noting that generally speaking, the ADA has not required employers to hire another employee to provide a disability accommodation.  However, whether the hiring of another employee creates an “undue hardship” on the employer (in regard to the accommodation request) focuses on the resources of the employer.  If this were a “mom and pop” employer, I think this would be an entirely different situation.  I find it hard to believe that a court would find that a small(er) employer would be required to accommodate a disabled employee by hiring another person to do many/a majority of the disabled employee’s job responsibilities.  However, an employer like WalMart likely could accommodate this request to enable a disabled employee to do their job.  Does that mean the Seventh Circuit will uphold the jury verdict?  Not necessarily.  With that being said, oral arguments are set for Friday.  For those interested, this is a case worth keeping an eye on going forward.


For additional information:  https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/EEOCvWalMartStoresIncetalDocketNo20034737thCirDec182020CourtDocke?1632836502

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...

What I've Been Reading This Week

Recently, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Commissioner, Chai Feldblum, had her re-nomination on the brink, after Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee took steps to block it .  Readers might have heard that late last week, Commissioner Feldblum's re-nomination quietly slipped away and she tweeted out a thank you to supporters and friends, acknowledging that her time at the EEOC was over.  While there has not been much in the way of a further update in regard to that ongoing saga, we wait to see how things will play out at the EEOC, now that it has lost a quorum until additional Commissioners are confirmed by the Senate. For the time being, there are other developments for readers to review this week.  In particular, I call attention to the article on managing a wage & hour audit by the Department of Labor as well as steps an employer can take to better ensure compliance with the ADA. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. ...

Senator Bernie Sanders To Introduce Bill Requiring Large Corporations To Pay For Federal Assistance Programs

Next week, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is set to introduce legislation which would require large employers such as Walmart, Amazon, and McDonald's to fully cover the cost of food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and other federal assistance programs that their employees receive.  Senator Sanders has stated that the goal is to force these large employers to pay their employees a living wage and cut back on the nearly $150 billion in taxpayer dollars that go toward funding these federal programs every year. As for the specifics, a 100% tax on government benefits received would be imposed on government benefits received by workers at companies with 500 or more employees.  For instance, if a Walmart employee received $500 in food stamps, Walmart would be taxed $500. To call this proposed legislation groundbreaking would be an understatement.  I would expect that Senator Sanders, an Independent that caucuses with Democrats, is going to face an uphill battle gett...