February 4, 2023

Volume XIII, Number 35

Error message

  • Warning: Undefined variable $settings in include_once() (line 135 of /var/www/html/docroot/sites/default/settings.php).
  • Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in include_once() (line 135 of /var/www/html/docroot/sites/default/settings.php).
Advertisement

February 03, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 02, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 01, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Accurate Job Descriptions Remain Critical for ADA Compliance

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers do not have to excuse an employee from performing an essential function of a job as a reasonable accommodation. Several courts have found that a job duty is an essential function where an employee performs it up to twenty percent of the time, particularly where the job description suggests that an employee must be able to perform it.  The Eleventh Circuit has recently gone in a different direction.  In Brown v. Advanced Concept Innovations, Inc., the Eleventh Circuit held that such a function was not essential, and thus, an employer violated Florida’s anti-discrimination law (which courts interpret consistently with the ADA) by failing to excuse an employee from performing it. While Brown may arguably be an outlier, it reinforces the importance of maintaining accurate and up-to-date job descriptions.

The Decision

Timethia Brown worked for Advanced Concept Innovations, LLC (ACI), a packaging and manufacturing company, in a clerical job, that primarily required her to work at her desk in the office, but that also required her to work on the production floor up to twenty percent of her working time.  Brown developed a condition that caused her to produce an excessive amount of saliva and asked ACI to allow her to use a “spit cup” while working at her desk and to excuse her from working on the production floor, where sanitation and cleanliness requirements prohibited her from spitting in a cup.  ACI allowed her to use a spit cup at her desk, but it did not excuse her from working on the production floor because it determined that doing so was an essential function of her job.  Because ACI determined that Brown could not perform that duty with or without a reasonable accommodation, it terminated her employment.

Brown subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging that ACI had violated the disability-discrimination provisions of the Florida Civil Rights Act.  A jury found that working on the production floor was not an essential function of Brown’s job and found in her favor.  Applying ADA regulations and cases to Brown’s state-law claim, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the jury’s decision, relying principally on three facts.  First, Brown worked on the production floor at most only twenty percent of the time.  Second, other employees could perform her work in that area.  Finally, although the job description included “walking to and from the production area is required” under “Physical Demands,” it did not specifically refer to performing work in the area under a section describing the job’s “Primary Responsibility.”

Employer Takeaways

Brown arguably diverges from other circuits’ decisions and earlier Eleventh Circuit cases holding that a job duty is an essential function where the employee performed it up to twenty percent of the time and the job description at least indicated that performing the duty was part of the employee’s job.  Nonetheless, the decision in Brown serves as a reminder to employers, particularly in the Eleventh Circuit (which covers the states of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia), of the importance of maintaining accurate job descriptions.  Employers should review, and if, necessary, revise, their job descriptions to ensure they not only identify all essential functions, but also expressly describe them as duties or responsibilities.  Additionally, since job duties may change more rapidly than an employer can update its job descriptions, employers may also want to consider noting in their job descriptions that supervisors may assign additional duties and responsibilities.

©2023 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume XII, Number 343
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Francesco DeLuca Labor Employment Attorney Epstein Becker Law Firm Boston
Senior Counsel

Resolving labor and employment disputes is at the heart of Fran DeLuca’s practice. Employers in the financial services, technology, health care, life sciences, and manufacturing industries rely on Fran to represent them in state and federal courts and before administrative agencies in a wide array of disputes, including cases involving sensitive allegations of discrimination and harassment, high-stakes wage and hour class actions, and unfair competition matters. Regardless of the type of case, Fran develops creative and practical litigation strategies to reduce or...

617-603-1082
Associate

Health care facilities, academic institutions, and other employers value the hard work and sharp mind of labor and employment attorney Sherelle Wu. She focuses her work on employment discrimination, employee classification, wage and hour, noncompetition, and Title IX matters.

Sherelle has helped represent clients in discrimination matters in agency and court proceedings and counseled clients on OSHA compliance, vaccine mandates, and paid family medical leave issues. Clients also seek Sherelle’s assistance with drafting employment contracts and...

617-603-1084
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement