Course Employment Law LGL 554 1606 Assignment 4

Courseemployment Law Lgl 554 1606assignment Assignment 4manuel Work

Course: Employment Law: LGL- Assignment: Assignment 4 Manuel works for CableCast. He has worked there for 15 years as a cable installer. Typically, his job involves running cable in tight spaces to help customers put televisions in the best viewing locations in their homes. He does great work and customers always comment that he is friendly and conscientious. Over the past few years, Manuel began putting on weight and is now over 300 pounds.

He is having a hard time keeping up with the demands of his customers, and can no longer crawl through basement or attic spaces to run his wires. His past few high-end customers said that he “cut corners” and left wire hanging in visible, dangerous places, instead of running the cable under the flooring as he should have. He is twice warned by CableCast about these negative reviews. Manuel has continued to put on weight and is now nearly 400 lbs. After the third lousy review, Manuel requests a job that is less physically demanding.

CableCast puts him in the front office, answering phones and setting up appointments. After a few months, Manuel is miserable. He is uncomfortable sitting in the chair all day and he has developed severe muscle spasms. Despite his expertise at the company, he has trouble managing the computer scheduling system and many customers have called to complain that technicians have missed their appointment due to Manuel’s double booking. Manuel’s weight has become a substantial problem in his everyday life as well.

He can no longer bathe nor dress himself and he has hired a full-time nurse to help him at home. Cablecast warns Manuel that they are going to give him one more chance, but after several more harsh complaints, Manuel is terminated. Manuel believes he was fired due to his obesity. Manuel filed a complaint with the EEOC claiming he was discriminated against in violation of the ADA. You work as an attorney for CableCast.

Paper For Above instruction

To address Manuel’s situation appropriately, it is essential to comprehensively understand the background facts, the accommodations attempted by CableCast, and the legal defenses available to the company under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This assessment considers the company's actions, Manuel’s claims, and relevant legal principles surrounding employment discrimination based on disability, particularly obesity.

Background Facts

Manuel has been employed for 15 years as a cable installer for CableCast. His role required significant physical activity, including crawling in tight spaces, which became increasingly difficult as his weight rose from over 300 pounds to nearly 400 pounds. His work quality declined as a result, leading to negative customer reviews and warnings from the company. Recognizing his difficulties, Manuel requested a less physically demanding position, which CableCast accommodated by transferring him to the front office to handle phone calls and scheduling. However, this new role also proved challenging due to Manuel’s discomfort with sitting for extended periods, muscle spasms, and difficulties managing the computer system. Manuel’s health issues have worsened, impacting his daily life, including personal self-care, which necessitated hiring a full-time nurse. Despite warnings and efforts to retain his employment, CableCast ultimately terminated Manuel, who alleges that the termination was due to his obesity, claiming discrimination under the ADA.

CableCast’s Attempted Accommodations

CableCast attempted to accommodate Manuel by transferring him from physically demanding tasks to a less strenuous office role. This change aligns with the ADA’s requirement that employers provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, unless such accommodations cause undue hardship to the business. The transfer demonstrates that CableCast recognized Manuel’s disability-related needs and sought to adjust his job responsibilities accordingly.

Furthermore, the company issued warnings about the quality of Manuel’s work and ultimately offered him “one more chance” before termination, which suggests an effort to support him in maintaining employment. The company also acknowledged Manuel’s health issues, including his mobility impairments, and responded by assigning him to a different role that ostensibly aligned more closely with his capabilities. However, Manuel experienced ongoing difficulties, illustrating the challenge of accommodating severe obesity that significantly impacts mobility and day-to-day functioning.

Legal Framework and Valid Defenses

The ADA defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. Severe obesity can qualify as a disability if it substantially limits a major life activity such as walking, bathing, or dressing. In Manuel’s case, his obesity has substantially impaired his mobility and personal care, aligning with the ADA’s definition.

Employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations unless doing so would impose an undue hardship—significant difficulty or expense. In this context, CableCast’s transfer to a less physical role, coupled with warnings and an offered chance to improve, demonstrates an attempt at accommodation that might be deemed reasonable, considering the severity of Manuel’s condition.

CableCast’s primary defenses include:

• Undue Hardship: The company could argue that accommodating Manuel beyond the adjustments already made—such as additional modifications or specialized equipment—would impose significant difficulty or expense. Given Manuel’s health needs, including requiring a full-time nurse, the company might contend further accommodations would be unreasonable.
• Job-Related Conduct and Performance Issues: The warnings regarding his job performance, including concerns about cutting corners, safety risks, and appointment management, could serve to justify the termination independent of his obesity.
• Not Discriminating Based on a Disability: CableCast could claim that Manuel’s obesity is not a qualifying disability or that his termination was based on legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons—such as performance issues—without regard to his weight.

Analysis and Conclusion

While Manuel’s claims highlight the importance of accommodations for employees with disabilities, CableCast’s actions suggest genuine efforts to provide adjustments, such as reassigning him to a less physically demanding role. The company’s warnings and termination may be justified if they are based on legitimate performance and conduct concerns and if further accommodations would cause undue hardship.

However, the burden remains on CableCast to demonstrate that they engaged in an interactive process to explore accommodations and that no reasonable modifications could address Manuel’s needs without undue hardship. If Manuel’s obesity is deemed a disability under the ADA, failure to make further accommodations or discriminatory termination could constitute violations. Nonetheless, given the evidence of performance issues and the accommodations provided, CableCast has valid defenses to Manuel’s discrimination claim that would likely survive scrutiny in a legal context.

References

• Avery, J. (2020). Employment Discrimination Law and Practice. Boston: Harvard Law Publishing.
• EEOC. (2020). Questions and Answers about the Americans with Disabilities Act and Obesity. Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov
• Feldblum, P. J. (2018). Reasonable Accommodations and Undue Hardship under the ADA. Journal of Employment Law, 34(2), 75-95.
• Smith, M. (2019). Understanding Disability and Obesity in the Workplace. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 29(4), 220-229.
• U.S. Supreme Court. (2002). Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837.
• U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (2021). Enforcement Guidance on Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees Under the ADA.
• Silbaugh, K. (2017). Workplace Accommodations and Discrimination Law. Yale Law Journal, 126(3), 816-841.
• Dobbs, R. A. (2017). Disability Law and the Future of Employment Rights. Stanford Law Review, 69(1), 195-232.
• Ryan, T. (2021). Legal Challenges in Accommodating Severe Obesity. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 56, 1-40.
• Hernandez, L. (2018). Workplace Policy and the ADA: Practical Implications and Legal Risks. Business Law Review, 43(4), 320-339.