Cerebral Palsy Discrimination

United Cerebral Palsy  (”UCP”) is a leading source of information on cerebral palsy or CP.  United Cerebral Palsy’s mission is to advance the independence, productivity and full citizenship of people with disabilities.  According to the UCP website at http://www.ucp.org , cerebral palsy is a term used to describe a group of chronic conditions affecting body movement and muscle coordination.  It is caused by damage to one or more specific areas of the brain, usually occurring during fetal development; before, during, or shortly after birth; or during infancy.  Thus, these disorders are not caused by problems in the muscles or nerves.  Instead, faulty development or damage to motor areas in the brain disrupt the brain’s ability to adequately control movement and posture.  Although CP is not “curable” in the accepted sense, training and therapy can help improve function.

For its own part, the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including disability discrimination in the workplace.  In an August 24, 2009 Press Release, the EEOC announced that it has filed a federal discrimination lawsuit against a national retailer, charging that the company unlawfully denied a reasonable accommodation to an employee with cerebral palsy and limited intellectual functioning.  As stated in the EEOC Press Release, the disabled worker could not effectively communicate with others without the assistance of a job coach, and EEOC attorneys claim that the company compelled the employee to attend in-person meetings involving work issues alone without the assistance of a job coach or parent, even though repeated requests had allegedly been made by the job coaches and parents to be in attendance at the meetings. See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-24-09.html .  The Press Release also said that the company hired this employee with full knoweldge of his disabilities and need for a reasonable accommodation.  Such alleged conduct violates Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release said that the case was particularly disturbing because the company “already knew this employee was disabled and needed assistance with communicating during in-person meetings [and] … the employee in this case was qualified and motivated to work …” 

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