Posts

Seventh Circuit: Obesity is a Disability Under the ADA Under Limited Circumstances

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 12, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Richardson v. Chicago Transit Authority, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that obesity would only be considered a disability under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) if the obesity is caused by a physiological disorder or condition.  This decision aligns the Seventh Circuit with the Second, Sixth, and Eighth Circuit courts.

Generally, employers covered by the ADA are required to provide disabled employees with reasonable accommodations that will allow the disabled person to perform the essential function of their job.  Richardson provides employers with guidance on how the ADA applies to obesity.  If an obese individual’s condition prevents them from performing essential job duties, or threatens the safety of others, employers may still need to engage in the interactive process to determine if the individual’s condition qualifies under the ADA or other state or local laws.

Action Items

  1. Review interactive process procedures for consistency with this ruling.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2019 ManagEase

October Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. U.S. Department of Labor Issues Updated FMLA Forms
  2. EEO-1 Reporting Deadline Still March 31st
  3. NLRB: E-Verify Enrollment is a Mandatory Subject of Bargaining
  4. IRS Updates Paid Family Leave Tax Credit
  5. Sixth Circuit: Educational Institution’s Investigation Procedures Challenged in Title IX Case
  6. Seventh Circuit: Potential Back Pay in Hostile Work Environment Claims
  7. Ninth Circuit Affirms DOL Guidance on “20% Rule” for Tipped Employees
  8. California: IMPORTANT – Update on How Split Shifts Are Paid
  9. San Francisco, CA: Update Fair Chance Ordinance Notice/Poster
  10. New York: Home Care Workers’ “13-Hour Rule” is Invalid

Read more

Seventh Circuit: Fair Credit Reporting Act Pre-Adverse Action Requirements Are Actionable

APPLIES TO

Employers with IL, IN, WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 29, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s recently ruling, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that an employer’s failure to provide a copy of an applicant’s background check report and notice of rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) gives an applicant standing to sue the employer, because it amounts to an allegation of being deprived a chance to benefit. Employers are required to provide the report and notice to applicants under the FCRA so that they may have the opportunity to contest the accuracy or completeness of the information.

Seventh Circuit: ADEA Applies to Employees and Job Applicants

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 26, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In a split from an Eleventh Circuit ruling last year, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently stated that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) provides protections not only to current employees aged 40 or older, but to similarly situated job applicants as well.

Seventh Circuit: Defines Application of the Ministerial Exception in Discrimination Claims

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

February 13, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Miriam Grussgott v. Milwaukee Jewish Day School, Inc., the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal used a “totality of circumstances” approach to determine that a Hebrew teacher’s position was ministerial in nature, rendering her ineligible to pursue an employment discrimination claim under the Americans with Disability Act.

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court used four factors to determine whether an employee’s role is ministerial: (1) formal job position title, (2) substance of the position based on the title, (3) the employee’s use of the title, and (4) the religious functions the employee performed for the religious institution. Here, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal used these factors to analyze the employee’s claim, and indicated that the factors must be reviewed under the totality of the circumstances. Specifically, although the employee’s job title of “Hebrew teacher” was not ministerial nor did she hold herself out as a religious leader, when looking at the totality of the circumstances, the court stated that the facts supporting the substance of the job title and her actual job functions outweighed those considerations.

The Seventh Circuit’s decision emphasizes the need to clearly communicate an employee’s job title, duties, and the organization’s expectations.

Action Items

  1. Have job descriptions reviewed for consistency with ministerial duties, if applicable.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2018 ManagEase

Seventh Circuit: Additional Months of Leave after FMLA not a Reasonable Accommodation

APPLIES TO

All Employers of IL, IN, WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

September 20, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Employers may already know that certain types of leaves of absence may qualify as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).  However, the Seventh Circuit recently confirmed that an employee’s request to take additional months of leave after exhausting his FMLA allotment was not a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.

September Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. The Recent Federal Overtime Exemption Rule is Diminishing
  2. NLRB: More Examples of What is or isn’t Protected Concerted Activities on Facebook
  3. EEOC Must Reconsider Wellness Regulations
  4. Seventh Circuit: EEOC May Investigate Despite Right-to-Sue Letter and Issue of Judgment
  5. Arizona, Maryland, Wyoming:  Now Part of the E-Verify RIDE Program
  6. Berkeley, CA: Minimum Wage Increase, Paid Sick Leave, and Work Schedule Rules Will Soon Be In Effect
  7. San Diego, CA:  Equal Pay Bill for City Contractors and Consultants
  8. Santa Clara, CA: Santa Clara City’s Minimum Wage to Increase in 2018
  9. Connecticut: Anti-Discrimination Protections Expanded for Veterans
  10. Georgia: Amended Law Now Preempts Predictive Scheduling Ordinances
  11. New Jersey:  Anti-Discrimination Protections for Military and Veterans Expanded
  12. New York: Guidance on Tax Treatment of PFL Contributions and Benefits now Available
  13. Nevada: Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act Poster Now Available
  14. North Carolina:  Fair Classification Act Emphasizes State Focus on Proper Employee Classification
  15. Texas: Hurricane Harvey Relief for Employees
  16. Washington:  New Biometric Information Protection law

Read more

Seventh Circuit is the First Federal Court of Appeals to Recognize Sexual Orientation as a Federally Protected Class

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 4, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

discriminationIn Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College, hearing the case en banc, the Seventh Circuit became the first federal court of appeals to determine that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The court stated that “it is impossible to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without discriminating on the basis of sex.”

This landmark decision effectively prohibits discrimination and retaliation against applicants and employees on the basis of sexual orientation under federal law.

U.S. Supreme Court to Resolve Split on Validity of Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements

APPLIES TO

All Employers

EFFECTIVE

Expected Summer 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Last year, we reported on the Ninth and Seventh Circuit cases stating that class action waivers in arbitration agreements are invalid under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).  The Second, Fifth and Eighth Circuits have taken the opposite stance, concluding that employment agreements that require claims to be arbitrated individually are fully enforceable.

Due to this split in opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court has finally decided to review the issue at hand.  The Supreme Court will be reviewing three decisions: the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in favor of enforcing class action waivers, and the Ninth and Seventh Circuit’s rulings against.  A decision is anticipated sometime in the Summer of this year.

Employers should stay tuned, as the outcome of the Supreme Court’s review could affect workplace employment agreements.  ManagEase will continue to report on this developing area as updates occur.


Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2017 ManagEase, Incorporated.