Supreme Court Holds ADA Doesn't Require Employer To Violate Its Seniority
Policy
May 2002
Paul Siegel explains the recent U.S. Supreme
Court ruling that the Americans With Disabilities Act does not require an employer
to violate a seniority-based system to transfer a disabled employee to another
position as a reasonable accommodation.
by Paul
J. Siegel, Esq.
Jackson, Lewis,
Schnitzler & Krupman
On April 29, 2002, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held the Americans
With Disabilities Act ordinarily does not require an employer to violate a seniority-based
system to transfer a qualified disabled employee to another position as a reasonable
accommodation. In U.S. Airways, Inc. v Barnett,
U.S., No. 00-1250, the Court held a plaintiff has the burden of proving a requested
accommodation is reasonable, and when the accommodation is on its face "unreasonable,"
the employee must establish special circumstances that make the otherwise unreasonable
accommodation reasonable.
The plaintiff, Robert Barnett, was a cargo handler for U.S. Airways. He injured
his back while working for U.S. Airways and invoked seniority rights to transfer
to a less physically demanding mailroom position. Mr. Barnett learned two employees
with greater seniority planned to bid on his job. He asked U.S. Airways to make
an exception to the seniority system and allow him to remain in the mailroom
as an accommodation. U.S. Airways decided not to make an exception to its seniority
system, and Mr. Barnett lost his job.
Mr. Barnett sued U.S. Airways claiming it violated the Americans With Disabilities
Act (ADA) by refusing to make an exception to its seniority system. U.S. Airways
argued the ADA does not require an employer to reassign a disabled employee
to a position as a reasonable accommodation when another employee is entitled
to hold the position under the employer's bona fide seniority system. The trial
court agreed with U.S. Airways and granted its motion for summary judgment.
However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disagreed and reversed
the trial court's decision.
The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's opinion and held, in most
cases, the ADA does not require an employer to violate a bona fide seniority
system as a reasonable accommodation. However, the Court held an employee is
free to show special circumstances that would make an exception to a seniority
system a reasonable accommodation. For example, the Court stated an employee
may be able to show the employer made exceptions to the seniority system. If
the employee proves such special circumstances, the employer would then have
to defend a failure to accommodate by proving the accommodation posed an undue
hardship.
Essentially, the Court's ruling establishes a two-step approach to analyzing
requests for reasonable accommodation. Employers first have to decide whether
a requested accommodation is "reasonable" on its face. If an accommodation is
"reasonable," employers must then determine whether providing an accommodation
poses an undue hardship. The decision suggests employers that make exceptions
to generally established policies may be in a more difficult position to argue
that requests to bend those policies as an ADA accommodation are "unreasonable."
In his dissent, Justice Scalia criticized the opinion stating, "the Court's
opinion leaves the question whether a seniority system must be disregarded in
order to accommodate a disabled employee in a state of uncertainty that can
be resolved only through constant litigation."
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are
not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles
and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other
professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney,
accountant, or other qualified adviser.