Many clients that come into our offices in Miami, Florida complain about being overworked and suffering from chronic fatigue. Especially nowadays where employees are being asked to put in extra effort, employees are asking if there is some relief. Well, recently, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that chronic fatigue syndrome could qualify as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which would require employers to accommodate the disability. That means that an employer may be required to allow napping and to alternate tasks frequently.
Under the ADA, employers must accommodate a known disability of an employee as long as it will not create an "undue hardship" on the employer's business. Providing a reasonable accommodation means changing aspects of the job so that the employee with a disability can perform the job. Undue hardship means something that causes significant difficulty or expense to the employer, considering the size, financial resources, and the nature of the employer's operations.
In the Fifth Circuit case, EEOC v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Co., LP, No. 07-20661 (5th. Cir. 6/5/2009), the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit against Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. alleging that the company fired an administrative aid because she requested the accommodation that had been suggested by her doctor. Her doctor had suggested that she be permitted to nap and that she be given alternating tasks. The issue arose about two years after the employee began working with Chevron. She began experiencing sleep disruptions, fevers, headaches, trouble walking and problems with memory and concentrating. She was allowed to take a two week leave and when she returned to work, she provided a note from her doctor stating that she had chronic fatigue syndrome and that she needed to be at a location closer to her home. She was not permitted to relocate, but then her doctor stated that she needed to be allowed napping during lunch and had to be provided alternating tasks. She implemented these accommodations on her own after informing her employer. Five days later, the company suspended her without pay and eventually fired her, alleging that she failed to disclose the impairment on the medical questionnaire that she was required to fill-out upon being hired.
The EEOC filed suit in federal court, but the court threw out the case stating that "no reasonable jury could find that [the employee] had a disability within the meaning of the ADA." The EEOC appealed the decision and the Circuit Court found that chronic fatigue syndrome could be a disability. The court further held that a jury ought to have the opportunity to decide whether the employer failed to accommodate the disability and fired her on the basis of her disability.
This case is typical of the results that many expect to come out of the new amendments to the ADA, which took effect in January 2009. These amendments may make it easier for claims to be brought under the ADA. Employee claims are expected to now be evaluated on the basis of whether discrimination actually occurred, and not whether an employee can actually provide a disability.
If you have questions regarding the scope of the ADA, contact Santiago Padilla, Law Offices of Santiago J. Padilla, P.A. as soon as possible. Based in Miami, Florida, we represent workers and employers throughout South Florida in employment cases. To set up a free initial consultation, you can contact us through the Internet or call us at (305) 358-1949.
