On September 30, 2024, President Biden officially proclaimed October as National Disability Employment Awareness Month while promoting inclusive workplaces. 

This year's focus is advancing access and inclusion which aligns with the core principles of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA eliminated the barriers individuals with disabilities faces, including employment. The ADA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations and ensure that job opportunities are accessible to those with disabilities. This allows the over 61 million Americans living with a disability the opportunity to be included, participate, and be respected in the workforce.  

Remember, employers don't have a choice; if an accommodation is wrongfully denied, the employee can sue for back pay, front pay, emotional distress damages, punitive damages and attorneys' fees. 

If you'd like to read President Biden's proclamation, click here. 

On 1/12/24, the Justice Department announced a proposed rule revision under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), targeting the accessibility of Medical Diagnostic Equipment (MDE) in state and local government entities. This move is a significant step towards ensuring that medical diagnostic equipment is accessible to all, regardless of disability. 

The rule, proposed by the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, seeks to amend title II of the ADA regulations. The primary goal is to establish explicit requirements, including technical standards, for accessible MDE provided by state and local governments. 

Key Provisions:

• Adoption of Standards: The rule proposes adopting standards set by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board for MDE.
• Scoping Requirements: Specifics on the amount and type of accessible MDE required.
• Deadline for Comments: Stakeholders can submit comments until February 12, 2024, primarily through the electronic Federal Docket Management System.

Starting on October 19, 2022, fines are going to be issued to any person who obstructs handicapped parking areas at a shopping center with one to four retail stores throughout New York State pursuant to S8822. 

That is not to say that this is all that can happen if landlords don't enforce and/or provide for handicapped parking at their shopping centers. Landlords who do not provide for access for the disabled can be sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state specific laws like the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL). So, such landlords should actively enforce their handicapped parking by also towing violators. Nonetheless, individuals who obstruct such spaces can't be sued under the ADA, so, it's a welcome sign that such obstructors will, at least, be ticketed for their thoughtless infraction.

Many employers utilize artificial intelligence or algorithms to select new employees, monitor performance, and determine pay or promotions. There are scored tests and resume analysis that are both common place in the big business world. However, the EEOC and DOJ just shot a cannon across the bow of big business' boat by stating that "[t]hese tools may result in unlawful discrimination against people with disabilities in violation of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA)."

To determine if discrimination has occurred, consider the following questions:

1. Was there an accommodations policy available and made known to employees / applicants?
1. If not, there likely was discrimination.
2. Does the AI / algorithm ask about the precise nature of the disability / medical condition? 
1. If so, there likely was discrimination. 

Education discrimination is illegal throughout the United States and in certain states, like New York, there are even greater protections, rights, and damages available to victims and their parents. 

When it comes to education, you and your child have a right to be free from harassment, bullying and other forms of wrongful discrimination that is perpetrated by teachers, the administration, or even other students (your peers). This applies to public schools, non-religious private schools, colleges and universities. Simply, you and your child can't be denied a right to learn because of who you are. 

Anti-discrimination laws in education apply regardless of whether the discrimination is explicit or implicit. While we've all heard about equal access to sports between the sexes / genders, or even teachers having sex with their students, discrimination lawsuits more commonly concern bullying of minorities, the failure to give testing accommodations to disabled students, and, even, the failure to extend days off to religious observers. Simply, it is the administration's duty to make education equally accessible to all and this failure can result in a lawsuit.  

On the federal level, Title IX of the Educational Amendments protects against sex discrimination while Title VI of the Civil Rights Act addresses race, color, and national origin discrimination, and finally Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects against disability discrimination. However, these federal laws on education discrimination were just limited by the Supreme Court and can, mostly, no longer result in victims receiving emotional distress or punitive damages.

Nonetheless, states, like New York, provide victims with the right to recover for their emotional distress and punitive damages. Moreover, New York adds protections by covering victims of discrimination with respect to additional categories, such as race, color, religion, disability, national origin, sexual orientation, military status, sex, age and marital status. New York even makes clear that it's own public school districts can be held accountable for discrimination based on an amendment to its laws from July 25, 2019, A3425.

If you or your child were a victim of education discrimination, it is important to act quickly and file your claim after hiring a lawyer. In New York State, claims against public school districts must be filed within 3 months after the discriminatory event. While the State's anti-discrimination laws otherwise provide up to 3 years for lawsuits against non-public schools (i.e., private schools / colleges / universities), it's nonetheless important to act quickly to preserve all the discriminatory evidence (i.e., audio / video), which is done by immediately sending what is known as a spoliation notice.

To be clear, discrimination victims, in New York, can recover compensatory damages (being made whole with emotional distress damages), punitive damages (punishment damages), and your attorneys' fees. The perpetrator can lose their license (if licensed as educators or otherwise), be required to take trainings, and be ordered to stop their offensive behavior. There are fines and more. Discrimination is wrong and must be stopped. 

Don't be afraid to speak-up. If you are advancing an anti-discrimination right for yourself or your child, you are protected from retaliation. Even if it is ultimately found that you or your child was not discriminated against, you both can nonetheless be compensated for facing unlawful coercion, intimidation, threats, or other types of interference with your anti-discrimination rights. Again, this is not just true if you are advancing your own rights, it also applies if you are raising your child's rights, or another student's rights, because anti-retaliation laws protect anyone who aids and/or encourages someone else in exercising their rights to be free from discrimination. 

Attorney Advertising

According to Business Insider, Dollar General is paying their employees to get the COVID vaccine, but is that legal? 

Back in 2017, the federal courts, in AARP v. EEOC, addressed the issue of paying employees for participation in wellness programs and found that both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act were violated because the incentives permitted rendered the programs not voluntary, as required by law. The incentive, at issue in the case, was "up to 30% of the cost of self-only coverage." 

How does that comport with what Dollar General is now doing? 

They are offering four hours of pay to their employees. 

Is that too much to make participation voluntary? 

Ironically, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is proposing a new regulation about this voluntary standard in the Federal Register for public comment. This new regulation proposes to change the 30% incentive limit (as addressed in the federal case above) to a de minimis incentive limit. In fact, the regulation gives examples of a permitted de minimis incentive, like a water bottle or modest gift card.

Isn't four hours of pay worth a lot more than a water bottle? Is Dollar General going to get sued for this program. What do you think?