The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) was designed to protect workers with disabilities against employer discrimination. As a group discuss the following:
• In actual practice, how well does the Act achieve this goal? Explain. Support your answer with examples from recent court decisions.
Using the Library or other Web resources, identify and describe a case in which an employer’s activities were restricted due to age related rights of employees. Be sure to explain how the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s criteria for age discrimination apply to the case.
Discrimination unit 4
The constitution of any country is considered to be the source of laws and regulations of that particular country. Research shows that the United States of America has one of the best, democratic and strong constitution in the world today. The founding fathers of the country who designed the constitution primarily focused on the unity and equality of all people in the country owing to the diversity in America in the world today. One of the provision of the constitution that promotes unity and equality is the Americans With Disability Act (ADA). The Americans With Disability Actis focused on protecting individuals living and working in the US and are physically challenged (Recupero & Harms, 2013). The act helps to set a clear definition and meaning of disabilities to ensure that every individual understands what is being physically challenged, which in turn prevents discrimination by the disability. The cat goes on to provide a clear mandate that prohibits the discrimination of people living with disabilities, provides principles and standards for describing disability and discrimination as well as providing government support in enforcing these principles and standards. This assignment will attempt to identify and describe how well this Act achieves its goals.
One of the greatest achievements of this Act is the expansion of opportunities for individuals living with disabilities to live and participate in their communities. Research shows that the act ensures that persons with disabilities participate in community development. According to the supreme court of the country in the decision of Olmstead v. L.C., the civil rights of the members of the community are often violated under the ADA when they are unnecessarily segregated from the rest of the society (Kent, 2017). The judges of the court felt that for the Act to be fully effective and achieve its objectives, people living with disabilities must be given an opportunity to have their input and say regarding the matters that affect the entire society. Under this case, the court found it necessary to eliminate the unnecessary segregation of people with disabilities and to make sure that they receive services in the most integrated setting and environment appropriate to their needs and participate in community activities. Further research shows that the implementation of rulings, in this case, was meant to ensure that all the people with disabilities in the country live their lives to their fullest potential.
Another important achievement of this Act is the expansion of opportunities for civic Access. Research shows that most of the times, the interests, and needs of people are often ignored or not prioritized in most government offices and agencies. However, the passing and implementation of this Act promote the participation of all the people in the country irrespective of their physical challenges in all aspects of government activities. Therefore, through this act, the government provides an opportunity for physically challenged individuals to access government services, volunteer in programs, serve on boards and commissions as well as running for elected office (Jones, Toland, Kiviniemi, & Sanjo, 2012). The Act not only enhances collaboration and integration in the community, but also defines the community and country at large by eradicating physical and communication challenges that hinder persons with disabilities from actively contributing to the community life. A good case example of how ADA promotes community participation is the Alston v. Park Pleasant, Inc., No. 16-1464, 2017 WL 627381 (3d Cir. Feb. 15, 2017). In this case, the plaintiff, Alston, who was hired as a director of Nursing at an adult care facility was having significant performance issues only a year after her hiring. Unfortunately, she was diagnosed with breast cancer, but her performance continued to deteriorate and was eventually dismissed from her work. She sued her employer on discriminatory dismissal under the provision of ADA but failed to prove that she was disabled thus losing the petition (Jones, Toland, Kiviniemi, & Sanjo, 2012).
In the case of Bobby Dean Nickel vs. Corporate Express, the plaintiff was awarded $26mllion by a jury that established the discrimination of the plaintiff against and harassment because of his age by his supervising managers at staples. According to the case filed at a Los Angeles superior court, when Bobby Dean Nickel, 64 lost his job, his immediate employer Corporate Express was acquired by Staples Contract and Staples Inc. over the nine years, he was always receiving positive job reviews. However, after the acquisition of his immediate employer, the new employer felt the need to dismiss of older, higher paid workers in an attempt to cut company cost which eventually led to Nickel’s dismissal. After the dismissal, Nickel filed a lawsuit against the company and was compensated based on the damages suffered as a result of the termination of the contract. This case was in line with the provisions of the Age Discrimination In Employment Act (ADEA) that protects employees from discrimination by their employers particularly if they are above the age of 40 (Rutherglen, Markarian, & Federal Judicial Center, 2012). Unfortunately, this Act does not protect employees who are below the age of 40 despite the fact that some states have gone on to design laws that protect younger workers. Notably, the judiciary has a responsibility of ensuring that the provisions of these two Acts are implemented to promote a united and equal country.
Jones, N. L., Toland, C. J., Kiviniemi, J., & Sanjo, C. (2012). The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Provisions and protections.
Kent, J. (2017). ADA in Details. doi:10.1002/9781119277613
Recupero, P. R., & Harms, S. E. (2013). The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act in Disability Evaluations. Clinical Guide to Mental Disability Evaluations, 259-289. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5447-2_10
Rutherglen, G., Markarian, K., & Federal Judicial Center. (2012). Major issues in the federal law of employment discrimination. Washington, DC (One Columbus Circle NE: Federal Judicial Center.