The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation at http://www.cff.org/AboutCF/ states that cystic fibrosis is an inherited chronic disease which affects the lungs and digestive system of about 30,000 children and adults in the United States.  The Foundation further states that a defective gene and its protein product cause the body to produce unusually thick, sticky mucus which clogs the lungs and obstructs the pancreas, leading to life threatening lung infections and stopping natural enzymes from helping the body break down and absorb food.  About 1,000 new cases of cystic fibrosis are diagnosed each year. 

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including workplace related disability discrimination.  In an August 17, 2009 EEOC Press Release, agency attorneys announced that a California based go-kart racing operation will provide $50,000.00 and other relief to settle a federal lawsuit charging that the company refused to accommodate an employee with cystic fibrosis and fired him.  According to the Press Release, a company representative brushed off the employee’s need for an accommodation in order to do his job, stating he didn’t care and didn’t want to hear about his “lung thing.”  The company eventually fired the employee.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-17-09.html .  Disability discrimination violates the Americans With Disabilities Act, which requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees’ disabilities as long as this does not pose an undue hardship on the business.

Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

The Epilepsy Foundation describes epilepsy as a medical condition which produces seizures affecting a variety of mental and physical functions, saying it is also called seizure disorder.  The prevalence and incidence of epilepsy is said to affect almost 3 million people in the United States, with about 200,000 new cases of seizure disorders and epilepsy being diagnosed each year, according to information provided by the Foundation.  See, http://www.epilepsyfoundation.org .  With respect to epilepsy and workplace discrimination, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in an August 19, 2009 Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-19-09.html that the St. Louis Rams, a National Football League franchise, have agreed to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit for $134,000.00 and important remedial relief.  According to the EEOC Press Release, attorneys with the federal agency brought the disability discrimination lawsuit on behalf of a long-term employee with a seizure disorder.  In this regard, EEOC attorneys charged in the lawsuit that the employee was an assistant trainer who had epilepsy during his entire 11 year tenure with the team before he was fired.  As stated in the Press Release, the EEOC alleged that he had successfully performed his job until team management, in June 2006, claimed he was a medical liability and posed a threat to his own safety and that of coworkers.  A St. Louis EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release said “The St. Louis Rams, one of the most well-known and prestigious employers in our city, have a legal obligation under the ADA to provide a workplace free from disability discrimination.”  For further information about the EEOC, visit the federal agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

The Acting Assistant Attorney General for the U. S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Civil Rights Division is quoted in an August 13, 2009 DOJ Press Release as saying “Persons with disabilities who live in retirement communities are entitled to the protections of the Fair Housing Act.”  In this regard, the DOJ Press Release announced that the operator and manager of an Evansville, Indiana retirement community has agreed to pay up to $116,000.00 to resolve a housing discrimination lawsuit in which DOJ attorneys alleged that the defendants violated the Fair Housing Act by prohibiting the use of motorized wheelchairs and scooters in residents’ apartments and in the home’s common dining room during meals.  According to the Press Release, the lawsuit originated when two former residents of the retirement community filed separate complaints with the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (”HUD”) which, after an investigation, determined there was reasonable cause to believe that unlawful housing discrimination had occurred.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/August/09-crt-799.html .  As described in the DOJ Press Release, the federal Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability and familial status.  Another attorney quoted in the Press Release stated “This enforcement action provides yet another real-life example of our commitment to support the rights of persons with disabilities.”  Individuals who believe that they may have been victims of housing discrimination can call the Housing Discrimination Tip Line (1-800-896-7743), email the Justice Department at fairhousing@usdoj.gov or contact HUD at 1-800-669-9777.

In an August 7, 2009 Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-7-09c.html Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) attorneys announced that a media duplication company based in Salt Lake City will pay $65,000.00 to a former employee and furnish other injunctive relief in a consent decree to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the disability discrimination lawsuit charged that the company failed to provide reasonable accommodations to help a sales executive continue a successful sales career as his symptoms of Parkinson’s disease worsened and he requested accommodations such as placing him closer to his assistant and providing computer equipment to ease the need for writing.  EEOC attorneys charged further in the lawsuit that rather than providing the accommodations, the media duplication company placed the former employee on a “Performance Improvement Plan” for his alleged faltering sales and the terminated him before the 90-day performance improvement period expired.  The EEOC contended that he was actually fired because of his Parkinson’s disability and in retaliation for his accommodation requests.  In this regard, discrimination based on disabilities, such as Parkinson’s disease, is a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1991, as stated in the Press Release.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release stated that “[n]o one should have to endure this kind of treatment in the workplace” when they are experiencing Parkinson’s.  Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) attorneys charged in a disability discrimination lawsuit filed on July 31, 2009 that a Detriot provider of charter school education and related education services violated federal law by firing an employee because of her breast cancer.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the lawsuit alleges that the employee worked successufully for the company as a social worker, and, in April 2007, she advised her supervisor that she had been diagnosed with breast cancer and would need to take leave for treatment.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-31-09a.html .  As stated in the Press Release, her employment was terminated in July 2007 for unspecified reasons.  The EEOC asserts that she was the only social worker terminated by the company and the true reason for her termination was the breast cancer diagnosis.  Such alleged conduct violates the Americans With Disabilities Act which prohibits employers from terminating employees because of such medical conditions.  The EEOC filed the lawsuit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.  In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination and further information about the EEOC may be found in its website at www.eeoc.gov .

Attorneys with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in July 30, 2009 EEOC Press Release that a federal disability discrimination lawsuit has been filed by the federal agency against an Aransas Pass, Texas based personal loan company.  The disability bias lawsuit was filed in Corpus Christi and alleges that the company violated federal law by allegedly terminating an employee because of her relationship with her husband, who had a medical condition, and because the employer regarded her as being disabled.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-30-09.html .  According to the EEOC Press Release, the lawsuit charges that the company refused to allow the employee to return to work unless she submitted to a medical exam that would detect viruses.  In addition, the EEOC said the request was made when the employer became aware that the employee’s husband had a medical condition related to Hepatitis C.  As stated in the EEOC Press Release, the EEOC is challenging what it has determined is a non-job-related medical examination for a loan clerk given the extremely narrow avenues for transmission of the particular form of virus.  Further, the EEOC stated in the Press Release, after the employee refused to undergo the medical exam, the company discharged her because it regarded her as disabled due simply to her relationship with her husband.  An EEOC supervisory Trial Attorney with the San Antonio field office was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “This case involves an employment decision that had nothing to do with the employee’s ability to do her job completely, effectively and safely [and] a suit like this will, we hope, serve to get the message out to employers that workers should be judged on their actual qualifications and ability rather than on speculation and misguided perceptions about their health.”

In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the federal agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether employment related discrimination occurs in Aransas Pass, Corpus Christi, San Antonio or elsewhere, victims of workplace discrimination may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment discrimination claim.

In a July 29, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, the federal agency announced that a food service company will pay more than $90,000.00 and offer jobs to discrimination victims to settle a class disability discrimination lawsuit brought by EEOC attorneys in Ohio.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the company violated federal law by allegedly failing to allow employees with disabilities to return to work without a fully duty, no-restriction doctor’s release.  In this regard, the EEOC asserted that this policy violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (”ADA”).  In addition, the EEOC said disabled employees who had been on leave and are able to return to work with some physical restrictions, but are still able to perform their jobs, should be allowed to do so.  Consequently, the consent decree settling the suit provides that the company will offer jobs to discrimination victims named in the decree.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-29-09.html .

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination and further information about the EEOC and the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 is available on the EEOC’s website at http://www.eeoc.gov/ada/amendments_notice.html .

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Miami District Director, Jacqueline McNair, stated in July 28, 2009 EEOC Press Release that “Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an individual who has a relationship or association with a person who has a disability, or because an individual is perceived to have a disability.”  In this regard, EEOC attorneys filed a disability discrimination lawsuit against a steak and seafood restaurant in Florida, charging that the restaurant violated federal law by discriminating against a female food server it regarded as being disabled and because of her relationship to a person with a disability.  According to the EEOC Press Release, when the restaurant discovered that the server had a son with a disability, it demanded that she take a prohibited medical test.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-28-09a.html .  In addition, the EEOC claims that when the server refused to take the test, the restaurant reduced her working hours, scheduled her to work on days when she was unavailable, and ultimately fired her.  As stated in the EEOC Press Release, the restaurant terminated the server because it regarded her as disabled and because of her association with her disabled son. 

For its own part, the EEOC Miami District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement and litigation in Florida, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.  During Fiscal Year 2008, disability discrimination charge filings with the EEOC nationwide rose to 19,453 - an increase of 10 percent from the prior fiscal year and the highest level in 14 years.  Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in a July 22, 2009 Press Release that the agency filed a disability discrimination lawsuit against a Kentucky area frozen food distributor alleging that the company violated federal law by refusing to hire a qualified applicant for a job because of the applicant’s vision impairment.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-22-09a.html .  EEOC attorneys charged in the lawsuit that the visually impaired applicant had successfully performed the duties of a temp-to-hire bakery laborer for approximately two and a half months when he applied for a permanent position.  According to the EEOC Press Release, he received a job offer contingent upon passing a physical exam, but, based on the vision portion of the exam, he was deemed unqualified for the permanent bakery laborer position, even though he was already successfully performing the job on temporary basis.  In its lawsuit, the EEOC charges that he was never hired on a permanent basis because of his disability.  Such alleged conduct violates Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act (”ADA”) and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.  The EEOC is seeking back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, as well as other relief.  An EEOC attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “It is unlawful for employers to deny qualified individuals with disabilities the opportunity to compete for jobs on a level playing field.”

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibitng employment discrimination and further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

In a July 22, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, EEOC attorneys announced that a Maryland medical practice will pay $125,000.00 and furnish significant remedial relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit in which the EEOC charged that the medical practice refused to return an employee to work who had recovered from breast cancer surgery.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the disability discrimination lawsuit alleged that the medical facility violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (”ADA”) when it discriminated against the employee by firing her when she had attempted to return to work after recovering from serious surgical complications.  As stated in the Press Release, she had been employed as a referral clerk for the practice for nearly 25 years and was diagnosed with breast cancer in January of 2007.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-22-09a.html .  About one week before her approved medical leave ended, she was called into work on May 31, 2007 and told her employer that she intended to work without interruption while undergoing her remaining chemotherapy sessions and radiation therapy for her cancer.  The practice administrator then allegedly cited examples of people she knew whose cancer treatments made them too sick to work.  At the meeting, the employee was presented with a termination letter that stated she was being fired because she was “currently unable to return to work on a full time basis … Due to the seriousness of her illness, and extended nature of the treatment required … we must exercise our option to permanently fill your position.”  In this regard, the ADA prohibits employers from making employment decisions based on assumptions and misinformation about a person’s medical condition, according to the Press Release. 

The EEOC stated that it has issued a compliance assistance document on cancer in the workplace, and the publication explains how the ADA might apply to job applicants and employees who have or had cancer.  The document is said to be available on the EEOC’s website and the website address provided was listed in the Press Release as http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/cancer.html . 

An EEOC Senior Trial Attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “This case should remind employers of their legal responsibility to women working with breast cancer [that] employment decisions cannot be made based upon fears and stereotypes about a person’s medical condition.”