Amid changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act comes a landmark federal-court ruling: Employees who can’t drive because of physical impairment can’t claim to be “disabled” based on that one limitation.
The case — Kellogg v. Energy Safety Servs. Inc. — concluded last month after a round of appeals over whether an employee with epilepsy who was barred from operating a motor vehicle could then demand disability accommodations from an employer.
A federal court handed down a firm “no” on the question.
Safety issues
The employee, who as part of her job had to drive to various locales, asked to be relieved of the driving duties after she suffered seizures and was diagnosed with epilepsy. The company argued that any other job for which she qualified had safety requirements the employee couldn’t meet. She eventually was let go by the employer, and then sued for violation of the ADA, saying that the driving restriction proved she met the requirements for a disability accommodation.
The federal court, citing the wording in the ADA regs, which don’t list “driving” as a major life activity, disagreed and found in favor of the employer.
Will the new amendments to the ADA change that? No one’s really sure. Here’s a legal summary of what the staff at one law firm thinks.
