Jump To Navigation

Publications

DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ IN THE NEWSPAPERS:
DOES SENIORITY REALLY TRUMP DISABILITY?

Last week, the national media widely reported on an important United States Supreme Court decision dealing with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Typical of many news media, the New York Times headline trumpeted, "COURT SAYS THAT SENIORITY HAS PRECEDENCE OVER DISABILITY." Although the body of the Times article explained the decision in more detail, many readers stopped at the headline and, as a result, came to a dangerously misleading impression of this decision.

Like ignorance, misinterpretation of the law is no excuse, and can cause loads of legal trouble. In the interest of lawsuit avoidance, we need to set this record straight. In the case, an injured US Airways baggage handler, Barnett, sought a "reasonable accommodation" under the ADA - permanent assignment to a less physically demanding job in the US Airways mailroom. However, two other US Airways employees with more seniority also sought the mailroom job. US Airways was left with a "damned if you do - damned if you don't" choice: should it honor Barnett's request for a "reasonable accommodation" as required by the ADA, or should it honor its seniority system as required by its collective bargaining agreement with its union? US Airways chose to honor its seniority system, and Barnett sued, claiming that by failing to provide him with his requested "reasonable accommodation," US Airways violated the ADA.

The case eventually ended up before the United States Supreme Court, which rendered a 5-4 decision (there's nothing like legal decisiveness...) in favor of US Airways, triggering headlines like the "seniority has precedence over disability" report quoted above. Consequently, many employers now believe the rule of law to be this: if a disabled employee requests assignment to a particular position as a "reasonable accommodation," and another, more senior employee requests the same position, the employer can safely choose the more senior employee without risking an ADA suit.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Here's what the Supreme Court really said . . . The law will generally respect the sanctity of a seniority system like the one US Airways had - a structured, pervasive seniority system that consistently governed the most important aspects of the employer-employee relationship. But if an employer did not typically use seniority as the benchmark for work assignments and other employee management decisions, seniority will most likely not trump an employee's ADA-inspired request for a reasonable accommodation.

Most employers, unless they are unionized, generally do not decide who gets what job based solely on seniority. They generally choose the person they deem most qualified, and while seniority might play a role, it is not the major determinant. Consequently, the general rule announced by the media headlines will not govern most employers. Indeed, among such employers, the law is precisely the opposite: seniority will probably not trump a request for a reasonable accommodation, and employers who act otherwise will be liable for substantial damages.

Dealing with requests for "reasonable accommodations" from employees who claim to be disabled is an incredibly difficult, legally-sophisticated process that is replete with lawsuit potential. There are no formulaic approaches. Be extremely careful, and involve counsel.

More Supreme Court ADA decisions are on the way. Stay tuned.


Powell, Trachtman, Logan, Carrle & Lombardo, P.C. is a full service law firm with offices in suburban Philadelphia, PA, Harrisburg, PA and Cherry Hill, NJ. Powell Trachtman represents a variety of commercial enterprises, entrepreneurs and business executives in respect to their litigation, litigation avoidance planning, business formation, business transactions, estate and tax planning, and other needs. We are also approved defense counsel for numerous insurance carriers in matters pertaining to professional malpractice, products liability, employment practices, directors and officers liability, and many other fields. For more information, contact us at info@powelltrachtman.com and visit our website at www.powelltrachtman.com.

©Copyright 2003 Powell, Trachtman, Logan, Carrle & Lombardo P.C. All rights reserved, except that recipients hereof are permitted, for noncommercial purposes, to provide copies or excerpts, with full attribution to us, to other interested persons for their personal use. Avoiding Lawsuits is distributed for general informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for personalized legal advice from a competent attorney.

Problems Prevented and Solved

Updating estate planning documents reveals major flaws - read more

Successful defense of computer hardware manufacturer - read more

Successful defense of employee's pregnancy discrimination and family leave act claims - read more

Six-figure settlement for manufacturing firm against consultants - read more

Defense verdict in favor of lift manufacturer - read more

Representation of retail distributor in acquisition of store locations - read more

Successful negotiation with the IRS to eliminate mounting interest and penalties for estate heirs - read more

Successful resolution of multi-million dollar hotel water intrusion/mold growth claim - read more

Creative estate tax planning for the owner of a Subchapter S Corporation - read more

Successful resolution of a deficient design claim for a designer and construction manager of a warehouse distribution facility - read more

Negotiation of a multi-million dollar statewide strategic sourcing contract - read more

Successful resolution of gender and race discrimination claim - read more

Successful enforcement of covenant not to compete - read more

Acquisition of industrial property requiring environmental remediation - read more

Successful resolution of sexual harassment claim - read more

$37 million verdict in contractor/municipality dispute - read more

Successful defense in architectural malpractice claim involving medical facility - read more

Examples of "preventive law" advice provided to clients - read more

Defense verdict for accounting firm in "deepening insolvency" case - read more

Creation of ESOP as part of founder's succession plan - read more

Negotiation and finalization of software transfer transaction - read more

Successful settlement of architectural malpractice claim in roof collapse case - read more

Successful settlement of action against architect in multi-phase condominium project - read more

Successful representation of design professional in historic building damage claim - read more

Successful resolution of quadriplegia personal injury claim against college - read more

Defense verdict in whistleblower/wrongful termination claim - read more

Successful resolution of shareholder buy/sell claim - read more

Successful defense of electrical product manufacturer - read more

Representation of company in the negotiation and drafting of executive employment agreements - read more

Successful defense of unfair competition action - read more

Successful resolution of claim by business buyer against business seller - read more

Representation of numerous companies in structuring reductions in force - read more

Successful resolution of claim against architectural firm involving design of concert hall - read more

Acquisition, financing and development of manufacturing facility - read more

Successful settlement in favor of architect on highway design claim - read more

Representation of manufacturing entity in asset-based lending transaction - read more

Contact Us

475 Allendale Road, Suite 200
King of Prussia, PA 19406
Phone: 610-354-9700
Fax: 610-354-9760
Directions to King of Prussia Office
email us

1814 East Route 70, Suite 350
Cherry Hill, NJ 08003
Phone:856-663-0021
Fax: 856-663-1590
Directions to Cherry Hill Office
email us

114 North Second Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Phone: 717-238-9300
Fax: 717-238-9325
Directions to Harrisburg Office
email us