Is driving a major life function

Darrell

I have an employee who has had seizures and is therefore restricted to not driving for 6 months. We have positions in the plant for this employeee to do but he is claiming he cannot come to work because he cannot drive. It this covered under ADA?

Hatchetman

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 06-20-02 AT 01:32PM (CST)[/font][p]While there is NO definitive description in ADA or EEOC regulations on what a "major life function" is, the examples that are given in ADA and by EEOC and in court cases where a factual dispute on the issue was being considered, do provide enough information:

The types of activities so far identified are walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, working, sitting, standing, lifting, reaching, concentrating, sleeping, performing manual tasks (the category of manual tasks, not just one or two), and there are some others, such as having sex. And one or two of these are still in disupte in some court rulings. You can see by the examples that the concept of major life activities is one that is essentially inherent in the living process. My recollection is that a court case actually ruled on driving, finding it not to be a major life activity...but I am unable to locate the specifics. I think there are many,many non-drivers who manage living quite well.

To answer your quesiton in a non-authoritative way, driving does not seem to be a major life activity.

But the issue is the cause of the seizures and whether or not the medical condition significantly impairs one or more of the major life activites listed above. If so, the fact that driving may also be impaired would only go to the reasonable accommodation issue if driving is an essential function of the job after determining that the individual is disabled under ADA (by the way, I hope you're not in California because we have a lower threshold for the imapirment of a major life activity issue).

Theresa Gegen TX

Seems to me that in this case, the employer should be asking a different question. The question to resolve this issue would be: Assuming the employee has a disability, what is the employer's duty to accomodate?

If the employee's normal position involves driving as an essential function, and he can't do that function, I don't see any way to reasonably accomodate in that job.

If there are jobs available that the employee is qualified for and that do not have functions that require him to violate his medical restrictions, then offering him one of those jobs would be a reasonable accomodation. But getting to work is probably up to him. I don't think an employer would be required to furnish a ride for an employee. What the employer should consider is this: Is there anything that the employer can do to help the employee get to work?

Some things you might want to consider are:

Giving the employee an opportunity to try to set up a carpooling situation with a coworker or helping the employee determine whether public transportation would be available.

Good Luck!!

shendrickson

I was under the impression that with ADA the employer was subject only to accomodations provided at the workplace. If you were to offer to post for a "carpool" you are doing so only to "assist" the employee, I have not read anywhere where you are required to go above and beyond the "in house" accomodations. In which case you should be able to challenge the employee. If his restrictions do not prevent him from working within your facility and he does not report for work offered, I would assume that you could terminate him dependant upon the employment laws within your state. I understand that California is a little less forgiving with regards to "impaired or disabled employees", still, this should be challenged. Good Luck.

NJODM

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-24-02 AT 08:19AM (CST)[/font][p]this depends on the job desription. How an employee gets to their place of employment is not the responsiblity of the employer. If you have other postions that do not require driving and the postion is open and funded then that would be a management option. Does your state offer accessible public transportation, and also how does the employee get around when not working?

Don D, sorry you assumed correct. It is not the employer responsibility. Mind was faster then the fingers.

phbair

In response to the specific question asked -is driving a major life function - the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (AL, GA, FL) answered this question in the negative last year. (See Chenoweth v. Hillsborough County, CA11, No. 00-10691, 5/10/01, [url]http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=11th&navby=case&no=0010691OPN&exact=1[/url]). The US Supreme Court recently declined to review the decision.

Don D

Notwithstanding the court ruling, which seems to answer the question; in response to Theresa and NJODM: I assume NJ meant to say that getting people to the job is NOT the employer's responsibility. Theresa's suggestion on carpooling and such is, I think, fine, if all you're doing is mentioning it conversationally in a general discussion with the ee. Assuming transportation options as the employer's obligation, however, is not only going the extra mile, but it's assuming an obligation on behalf of your employer that the law neither suggests nor requires.