Posts Tagged ‘ADA’

Record workers comp-related ADA payout

Wednesday, February 17th, 2010

An employer’s failure to to accommodate an injured worker to return to the workplace can be costly – just ask Sears Roebuck & Co., who learned the hard way. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) just announced that Sears will distribute $6.2 million to 235 former employees, the result of Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)-related litigation. The monetary distribution stems from a September 2009 consent decree which resolved a class lawsuit against the retail giant. It is the largest ADA settlement in a single lawsuit in EEOC history.
This case began in 2001, when appliance technician John Bava injured his knees, wrist, and back after falling down the stairs while on a service call at a customer’s home. The injuries required two surgeries and physical therapy.

“Afterward, he tried to go back to work under restricted conditions in which he would not be required to kneel or squat for a prolonged period. “They wouldn’t let me come back,” he said.
Bava, 58, said he applied for several other jobs at Sears, including a service manager position that he claims went to someone younger and less qualified. He said he learned he had lost his job when his wife tried to use his employee discount card and found it had been canceled.
Bava obtained a copy of his personnel file from Sears, and found a memo saying he had been fired for medical reasons.
Bava said he now works as a repairman for another employer and stays busy despite the restricted conditions that his injuries make necessary.”

Bava filed a discrimination charge through the EEOC. A subsequent investigation by EEOC turned up 235 other employees who sought return to work with an accommodation, but were fired by the company; more than 20 other claimants’ situations were investigated and found to be ineligible.
The average award is approximately $26,300. According to reports in the National Law Journal via Law.com, employees will receive between $2,500 and $122,500 each, depending on their individual circumstances. As with all EEOC litigation, none of the settlement fund will retained by the EEOC; all of it will be distributed.
Employers would do well to examine their own return-to-work policies and programs in light of the other provisions that the three-year consent decree prescribes beyond monetary relief: an injunction against violation of the ADA and retaliation, a requirement that Sears amend its workers’ compensation leave policy, and train its employees regarding the ADA. Sears must also provide written reports to the EEOC detailing its workers’ compensation practices’ compliance with the ADA and post a notice of the decree at all Sears locations.
Besides compliance with the ADA, there are several other lessons to be learned by the stunning lack of communications evidenced in this case:

  • When an employee is out on disability, stay in frequent communication to monitor their recovery progress
  • Have a return-to-work goal and plan for all injured workers
  • If you fire employees, tell them! They shouldn’t have to learn about it through canceled benefit cards.

Fear of Talking: The Narcoleptic Dispatcher

Monday, December 7th, 2009

Kenya Madden was hired as a police dispatcher for the Village of Hillsboro, Illinois, in July 2007. During the 10 week training period, she informed the trainer that she had narcolepsy, a disorder which causes people to fall asleep at unplanned moments. Some weeks later, she also informed her supervisor of her condition. The supervisor reacted with alarm. He had visions of Madden falling asleep in the middle of an urgent dispatch. He asked for Madden’s resignation. When she refused, he terminated her.
Madden filed suit under the ADA, alleging discrimination based upon (the perception) of a disability. This week, the case settled out of court for $10,001. Interesting number, interesting case.
There is no question that Madden’s supervisor mishandled the situation. With visions of disaster spinning in his head like demonic sugarplum fairies, he hastily put an end to the employment relationship. He did not ask for any details about the condition: how long she had experienced it; the degree to which medication controlled it; the last time she had an episode. He did not request permission to speak to Madden’s doctor. He reacted out of a fear totally out of proportion to the situation.
But Madden is not without fault. If her condition was under control, why did she feel obligated to disclose it twice (to the trainer and the supervisor)? If no accommodation was needed – and none was – then why did she bring up the issue?
We can read several things into the modest settlement: while the Village of Hillsboro mishandled the situation and violated the ADA, their actions appear to based upon the limited information provided by Madden: she could have attempted to reassure her supervisor by explaining the successful medical treatment she was receiving. She apparently was silent on the issue. A more gratuitous termination would have resulted in a six or seven figure settlement. Instead, Madden receives $10,000 for her trouble, with an extra dollar tossed in for good measure. That’s a pretty clear indication that while Madden was wronged, she may have had some responsibility for the situation.
This case illustrates a common problem in the way people perceive disability. We tend to jump to conclusions. “Narcolepsy” in a dispatcher sounds like an invitation to catastrophe.But it ain’t necessarily so. Try asking a few questions to determine just how big the risk is. Talk is cheap and talk, in situations like this, is definitely the way to go.

The Swine Flu, the ADA and Lawyers on the Prowl

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009

You might not think that the H1N1 virus, commonly know as swine flu, has anything to do with the ADA. Well, you clearly have not been reading Nation’s Restaurant News. Lisa Jennings writes a complex and cautionary tale for restaurant managers, warning them to back off from asking obviously sick employees whether they have the swine flu. Somehow, this advice does not sit well with me – or with anyone else who might sit down for a meal in a restaurant.
Attorneys with nothing else to do have raised the issue that swine flu may be a disability under the ADA. After all, we have all been warned of a potential pandemic and there have been a relatively small number of fatalities associated with the virus. But does that mean that every case of swine flu is a disability? Is the ADA’s recent recognition of shorter term disabilities meant to include a week of sore throats, coughing and fever?
Jennings quotes Virginia attorney Jonathan Mook, who notes that the ADA sets limits for when and how employers may inquire about medical conditions. He concedes that swine flu may not technically be a disability, but “it could be perceived as disabling because of the myths about it. If an employer asks specifically about swine flu, for example, and later is perceived as not wanting to work near the employee, even after the worker is no longer contagious, there may be grounds for a discrimination complaint.”
Are employers really supposed to worry about that?
Fortunately, the article recommends that employers focus on symptoms:

In communities where an outbreak occurs, it is a good idea to include in every preshift meeting questions about specific symptoms related to the flu. It’s also OK for employers to ask whether employees have fevers, sore throats, coughs or intestinal ills, so long as they don’t ask for a diagnosis [emphasis added].

In addition, attorneys say, employers are permitted to send employees home if they’re showing symptoms of the flu and are allowed to ask them to stay home for three to seven days, as recommended by the CDC in Atlanta–or as long as necessary to complete treatment, such as antiviral medication.

So the attorneys say that it’s ok to send people home for flu-like symptoms, as long as you don’t suggest that you are doing so because you think they have swine flu.
A Note from the Doctor and FMLA
To complicate matters even further, a specific diagnosis of swine flu is unlikely, as most people with flu-like symptoms are instructed to stay home and employ the usual remedies. We are not to go to hospitals and clinics unless symptoms are unusually severe. The CDC does not want to overwhelm emergency rooms and local clinics with needless requests for documentation.
On the other hand, if there is a formal diagnosis of swine flu, the employee may be eligible for FMLA leave, as this particular flu would be considered a “serious medical condition” – as opposed to regular flu, which might also kill you but is not viewed as a part of a world-wide pandemic. Go figure.
I hope that a fear of (preposterous) litigation does not result in employers keeping sick people at work. No one with flu-like symptoms belongs in the workplace. I have never sued anyone, but if my scrambled eggs are delivered by a waitperson with a runny nose, flushed skin, an expectorant cough and a raspy voice, I won’t eat a thing. And if there happens to be a lawyer in the next booth, I surely would be tempted to strike up a conversation.
Postscript: A note of thanks to my esteemed colleague Jennifer Christian, CEO of Webility, who somehow finds the time to read National Restaurant News.

New Health Wonk Review posted; other noteworthy news

Thursday, October 1st, 2009

For another biweekly issue of the best of the health policy blogs, Brady Augustine hosts The Boys (and Girls) of October edition of Health Wonk Review at medicaidfirstaid. Get a little baseball nostalgia with your health policy. For our neighbors in the Boston area, Brady recalls the era of Carlton Fisk, Carl Yastrzemski, Fred Lynn, Jim Rice, and Luis Tiant.
Other news notes…
ADA, RTW and the law – Failure to accommodate an injured worker as they return to the workplace can be costly. Sears is setting a $6.2 million bias case over just such an issue. Sears refused to reinstate a recovering injured worker with reasonable accommodations when he sought to return to work, and subsequently fired him. An investigation turned up more than 100 other employees who sought return to work with an accommodation, but were fired by the company.
New Mexico – “Thirty-three states, including neighboring Colorado and Arizona, already require workers’ compensation for farm workers, although some limit coverage or exempt small farms. But New Mexico’s agricultural workers fall into a job category not protected under state law.” New Mexico agricultural laborers sue for workers’ comp coverage.
PresenteeismIs presenteeism worse than absenteeism? Roberto Ceniceros looks at new research on the issue at CompTime.
Veteran issuesRisk and Insurance has been running an excellent series on issues facing vets on their return from Iraq and Afghanistan, authored by Peter Rousmaniere. The third and most recent installment: Dealing With Scar Tissues. If you haven’t been following, catch up here:
Part 1: Wounded Back Home
Part 2: Frayed Obligations
H1N1 Virus – Jon Gelman makes the case for the urgent need for workers compensation pandemic planning, noting that in the case of emergency, the Federal government has sweeping powers under the Public Health Service Act (PHS) that could disrupt employment throughout the country. He cites a recent Harvard School of Public Health study reveals that 80% of businesses foresee severe problems in maintaining operations if there is an outbreak, and looks at what this might mean to workers comp.
Flu.gov has issued Guidance for Businesses and Employers for the Fall Flu Season. Consumer resources are available at the Consumer Insurance Blog.

Health Wonk Review and other bloggy news notes

Thursday, September 4th, 2008

Hank Stern has posted a fresh roundup of news from the health wonkosphere over at InsureBlog – check it out: Health Wonk Review: Early September Edition.
ADA update – The folks at George’s Employment Blog has been keeping an eye on changes to the ADA. In July, George Lenard posted on what the ADA amendments will mean if they become law, and more recently, Karen Tofte has posted a second part in the series. She examines how the substantial limitation of major life activities element of the ADA’s definition of disability would be altered.
MA health care – Bob Laszewski of Health Care Policy and Marketplace Review comments on a recent NY Times editorial that looks at the Massachusetts health insurance experience and finds it less costly than expected. Bob points to some problems that must be factored in when assessing the program.
Technology risksErgonomics in the News points us to the article The Downside of Mobility: Injury: “As Wi-Fi–and laptops and mobile devices–become more ubiquitous, users from kids to adults find themselves suffering from injuries ranging from carpel tunnel syndrome to “BlackBerry thumb.” The first in a series of features and reviews on the ergonomics of Wi-Fi-induced mobility, this article offers tips on how to prevent injuries.”
Going and coming – Judge Robert Vonada of Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Journal reports that PA courts upheld compensability in the case of a home health nurse injured while traveling to her patient’s home. The case was complicated by the fact that she provided services to several employers in the course of her day.
Safety – BLR’s Daily Safety Advisor offers tips on Getting the most from your safety committee.

News roundup: Premium rates, ADA, disability awareness, OHIO privatization, and more

Wednesday, October 26th, 2005

RIMS Benchmark Survey: downturn in commercial rates
Commercial insurance renewal premiums in the third quarter were down by more than 5% from rates in the same quarter last year, although the survey notes that workers comp was the only major line to drop by less than 5%, with an average reduction of 3.75%. However, for many respondents, the effects of hurricane season hadn’t yet been factored into prices.
ADA protects persons “associated with” the disabled
Diane Pfadenhauer discusses a less widely recognized provision of the Americans With Disabilities Act that extends legal protections to those individuals who are associated with a disabled person.
October is Disability Awareness Month
According to the Society for Human Resource Managers (SHRM), there are 33 million people in the United States with disabilities and the unemployment rate for this population is 44%. SHRM notes that many employers fear high costs associated with making accommodations for workers with disabilities, but 38% of employers have not had to spend any money on accommodations and an additional 17% have spent less than $500.
For a whole different outlook on disability, you may want to see a film called Murderball about a team of quadriplegic rugby players. Some time back, Larry King featured a very compelling interview with a few of the charismatic team members – what an inspiration!
Ohio: many oppose privatization of workers comp
Despite the recent investment scandals, it seems that many employers, attorneys, and unions are unified in opposition to the idea of privatizing the state workers’ compensation system. Ohio is one of a diminishing number of monopolistic states. The current Bureau of Workers Compensation system was established in 1995 with a nine-member Workers’ Compensation Oversight Commission. Since then, it has been credited with speeding up claims and reducing premiums by an average of more than 30%.
The Best-laid Disaster Plans Are Merely Works in Progress
Workforce features an article offering an overview of problems and issues that HR departments faced in the aftermath of the Katrina disaster. The article profiles the experiences of three large employers – Entergy, Sodexho USA, and McDonalds – and some of the creative problem-solving that was required to locate and retain workers, communicate with workers despite the collapse of the communication infrastructure, arrange payments and administer benefit programs, and assist workers and their families in resolving various psycho-social issues.
12 picks for America’s Safest Companies of 2005
Occupational Hazards recognizes a dozen companies that set their own standards for safety excellence, exceeding OSHA and EPA regulations and industry norms. Safety efforts in these companies were generally characterized by high employee involvement and superior management commitment.
Insider View of the Vioxx trials in NJ
Robert Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams from Law.com’s arsenal of law bloggers offer first hand accounts from inside the courtroom at the VIOXX trial underway in New Jersey.
Also. from Legal Talk Network’s Workers Comp Matters:
Latex allergies in the workplace with Sandra Jutras, a career clinical nurse who developed a serious level one latex allergy; Attorney Jim Brady, and Dr. Gail Lenehan, national advocate and member of the Massachusetts Nurses Association’s Congress on Occupational Health and Safety.
Medicare set-aside allocations – Jean Feldman of CHOICE Medical Management discusses the complex issue of workers compensation Medicare set-aside allocations.
Making a difference
We can all sometimes get bogged down in the status quo and wonder if it’s still worth it to try to effect a change. It’s good to be reminded how one person can make an enormous difference – rest in peace, Rosa Parks. The LA Times has a wonderful tribute to this remarkable woman. (free registration required)

Genetic Testing, Part Two: The Heart of an Athlete

Wednesday, October 12th, 2005

Yesterday’s blog concerning genetic testing has prompted some thoughtful responses from our readers. It has also led to further research into the current and rather compelling story of Eddie Curry, a highly touted young center for the Chicago Bulls. Curry missed the last 13 games of the season and the playoffs due to a heart problem. The Bulls wanted him to submit to a genetic test, to determine whether he’s susceptible to cardiomyopathy, the ailment that killed former Boston Celtics guard Reggie Lewis and Loyola Marymount star Hank Gathers. Curry, citing his right to privacy, refused. He was subsequently traded to the New York Knicks, who say they have no intention of requiring the genetic test “because of New York’s privacy and employment laws.” Instead, the Knicks will rely on their team doctors.
John Hollinger at ESPN Insider was at the Knick’s press conference: “Isiah Thomas, [the Knicks general manager] must have said ‘I have tremendous confidence in our medical team’ about 12 times in a 20-minute [period].”
Wow. This is a loaded and truly fascinating situation. Were the Bulls being prudent in requiring the DNA test, or were they violating the ADA? Were they concerned for Curry’s well being or the team’s bottom line? Are the Knicks and their team doctors opening themselves to lawsuits (from Curry’s family, no less) for allowing him to play without knowing the details of his condition? Is the life of a 22 year old worth the risk, if he can pull down the boards and put up some points?
Hollinger has a rather scathing analysis of the risks the Knicks are taking: not the health risks per se, but the impact on the team’s future performance. He’s not impressed with their risk management skills.
The Death of Reggie Lewis
This situation brings to mind the saga of Reggie Lewis, the former Boston Celtics captain whose death from a heart ailment in 1993 is still wending its way through the courts. (A thorough and lucid summary of the story can be found here.) Lewis passed out briefly during a playoff game. He was sent to New England Baptist hospital where he underwent a number of tests supervised by a team of 12 of the most respected cardiologists in the Boston area. This team was called “The Dream Team” based on a similar phrase to describe the superior talent of the gold medal winning USA basketball of 1992. After thorough testing, the Dream Team diagnosed Lewis to be suffering from ventricular tachycardia, the most dangerous form of arrhythmia. The cause of this was believed to be focal cardiomyopathy, a disease of heart muscle. Of the various forms of arrhythmia, some are harmless and others are potentially life-threatening, such as this diagnosed one. Dr. Stanley Lewis, director of clinical cardiology at New England Deaconess Hospital and member of the Dream Team, said, “When you talk about arrhythmia’s that result in loss of consciousness’ you’re dealing with a deadly arrhythmia.”
Lewis found the dream team’s diagnosis — and its resulting immediate end of his basketball career — to be a nightmare, so he sought a second opinion. He consulted with Gilbert Mudge, a well known cardiologist who ran his own tests and declared that Lewis was not suffering from any sort of cardiomyopathy but merely from a curable neurocardiogenic fainting disorder.
Approximately two months after receiving Mudge’s favorable diagnosis, Reggie Lewis collapsed and died shooting baskets at a Boston gym. An autopsy revealed that his heart was abnormal, enlarged and extensively scarred. The state medical examiner was vague about the description of the scarring and the how it was likely caused.
Hidden Truth
Overarching this entire sad saga is the distinct possibility that Lewis abused cocaine. If this is true (his widow denies it vehemently), his failure to disclose the drug use directly impacted Mudge’s findings and those of the dream team as well. The author of this study finds plenty of blame to distribute among the blazing egos of the dream team docs, Gilbert Mudge and Reggie Lewis himself.
It is a cautionary tale, but the lessons are probably beyond the reach of the ambitious New York Knicks and their new center. In the best of worlds, people would look at all the available information and make informed judgments concerning Eddie Curry’s future. The world of professional sport is far from ideal — there is simply too much at stake. So here’s wishing Mr. Curry the best of luck as he throws up his jump shots and fights for his rebounds. Every time he loses his balance and falls to the floor, we’ll all just hold our collective breaths — to see if he is able to get up off the floor and go on with the game.

Alcoholism and Work: The Devil’s Brew

Tuesday, July 26th, 2005

We begin today’s blog not in the workplace, but in the home. The family basement, to be exact. According to the Detroit Free Press, Merle Rydesky wrapped a chain around his 57-year-old alcoholic brother’s neck, binding the other end to a bedpost in the basement. He padlocked the chain, pocketed the only key and left for work. His was trying to keep his younger brother sober, he said, in hopes of getting him into a treatment program. His brother had to stay sober for five days before he could be admitted to a detox program.
About four hours later, James Rydesky was found dead in his Dearborn MI home, choked to death by the chain wrapped over a basement banister, his body hanging in a semi-seated position. His elderly mother found the body.
The most surprising part of this story is that Merle Rydesky is a well-respected doctor who chaired the emergency medicine unit at Providence Hospital in Southfield for 20 years. He obviously did not specialize in substance abuse! Rydesky was spared any prison time by pleading guilty to involuntary manslaughter.
Rydesky’s dubious approach to detoxifying his brother raises a number of interesting issues related to drunkeness. We’ve been here before — in the high profile cases where employers are confronted with employees who drink. We recently profiled the case of Thomas Wellinger, who may qualify for the Guinness Book of Records for his blood alcohol content of .43. Driving in a drunken stupor, he wiped out a mother and her two sons — but as is so often the case in these tragedies, he himself survived and now faces serious criminal charges.
And in Newsday here’s yet another affluent individual whose driving has destroyed the lives of others and brought his own life to the verge of prison. This time it’s a well known trial attorney named Keith Kalmus. Prosecutors say Kalmus was driving at 85 mph in a 30 mph zone, lost control of his Ford Explorer and swerved into the eastbound lane, colliding with a Subaru sedan. The collision killed Belgian visitor Eva Bertuccioli-Krapfenbauer, 65, and critically injured her sister, Margot Krapfenbauer of Austria, and her son Claudio Bertuccioli and his wife, Rebecca McMillin, both of Brooklyn.
Alcoholism as Disability
There is little question that alcoholism is a life-threatening condition. What makes it unusual is that the threat is not just to the alcoholic, but encompasses immediate family members (just ask Dr. Rydesky) and innocent bystanders as well. It is considered an illness, but unlike most illnesses, theoretically the alcoholic can sober up at any time. This is one illness from which you can walk away when you are ready.
Under the ADA, recovered alcoholics are considered individuals with a disability and as such are protected from discrimination. However, the ADA draws the line at active drinking. Once employees “fall off the wagon,” they are no longer protected by the ADA. (Some state disability laws, however, expect employers to take proactive steps to help the relapsed employees enter a treatment program.) When employees have a drinking problem, employers are faced with a lot of uncertainty — up to a point. As soon as the drinking endangers the employee and or others, employers are expected to take decisive action.
Responding to Impaired Employees
We’ve been tracking the Wellinger case from the perspective of liability: who will pay the price for Wellinger’s appalling performance behind the wheel? His lawyers have taken steps to protect his assets, putting a valuable vacation home into a trust — and thereby out of the reach of his victims’ family. The search continues for the party or parties who provided the alcohol to fuel his astonishing blood alcohol level. Was it a package store? A bar? Most important for our purposes, what did the employer know about his impaired state? Did they allow him to drive off drunk, without taking appropriate action to protect the general public? If the employer had any knowledge of his drunken state, they will assume at least some of the liability for his actions, because they failed to notify the police of the immanent danger.
We encourage employers to have written policies to ensure a drug and alcohol free workplace. Most do. The problem is in the execution. How do you enforce the policy? How do you balance the privacy concerns of the employee with the obligation to provide a safe workplace? Most important, how should you respond when you become aware of a potential danger? Let’s say you take what you think is appropriate action because someone has a history of alcoholism and you think they look impaired, but it turns out you are wrong. They are perfectly sober. If you are not very careful, your “action” may be an act of discrimination. On the other hand, you have a popular employee who has four alcoholic drinks at lunch, but you take no action, because he’s such a good guy. He drives off and wreaks havoc on the road — and because you had knowledge of the drinking, you are liable for your failure to take action. Talk about being between a rock and a hard place!
These situations do not arise in a vacuum. I was struck in the Wellinger story about the months preceding the accident. He had gone through a painful divorce. Evidently, he was very distraught by the breakup. He was a good employee going through a rough time. I wonder what the employer did to support him during his troubled divorce. I wonder if they encouraged him to get help. I have no idea whether his drinking prior to the divorce was a problem, but he clearly began drinking more and more heavily after the divorce, building a remarkable tolerance that enabled him to reach nearly impossible blood alcohol levels. Did his supervisor look the other way? Did co-workers feel too embarrassed to question him? Did they simply hope the problem would go away? The truly sad part is that their failure to intervene probably contributed not only to the deaths of three innocent people, but to the end of Wellinger’s career as well.
Communicate!
If there is a single answer to these problematic situations, it’s keeping the lines of communication open. Management requires open eyes and, to the degree possible, open hearts. There are unthreatening ways of initiating a dialogue with troubled employees. It’s not easy, but considering the devastating tales in today’s blog, it’s well worth the effort.

More on the ADA

Friday, November 5th, 2004

Michael Fox from Jottings by an Employer’s Lawyer points us to a useful resource from the EEOC: How to Comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act: A Guide for Restaurants and Other Food Service Employers. And if ADA compliance has slipped off your radar screen lately, you may want to read Michael’s report about a recent $1.3 million jury judgment in a Louisiana disability case which involved the ADA.
And speaking of the ADA, Rafael Gely at LaborProf Blog pointed us to the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Digest. The current issue of the Digest features an article entitled Did the ADA Reduce Employment of the Disabled? This study refutes the notion that declines in employment of the disabled in the 1990s is related to the ADA as has been suggested:
“Jolls and Prescott infer that, apart from a short-term effect of the ADA’s requirement of special accommodations, the ADA was not causally linked to declining disabled employment over much of the 1990s. This conclusion, based on the relative effects of the ADA across states with different pre-ADA state-level regimes, stands in contrast to recent empirical work using national-level data. In light of their findings, Jolls and Prescott conclude that that the apparent negative employment effect of the ADA through much of the 1990s plausibly reflects not the impact of the ADA itself, but rather other contemporaneous changes disproportionately affecting individuals with disabilities.”

Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance

Wednesday, October 20th, 2004

How do you hire the right worker for the right job but avoid violating the ADA in the process? Michael at George’s Employment Blawg has done stellar work in unearthing some great Web resources on the topic so we are going to pass on the fruits of his labors and offer thanks for the pointers.
First and foremost, every job should have a written job description that describes the essential functions of the job. The job descriptions section of the Job Accommodation Network is an excellent resource to help in building descriptions that are ADA compliant.
Another unique set of tools that could be useful in developing job descriptions are 450 career videos available from America’s Career InfoNet. These short clips depict people performing the job, and describe the nature of the work involved in the job. In addition to being useful for developing job descriptions, they might also be helpful in planning return-to-work assignments.
Interviewing prospective employees is the next step in hiring. Michael points us to a good resource on asking the right questions to ensure ADA compliance. And to test your compliance quotient, take this quiz to see how successful you are at avoiding improper interview questions.
More information:
Job Accommodation Network
U.S. Department of Justice Americans with Disabilities Act Home Page