Lou Michels and Rod Satterwhite are partners in the Labor & Employment group at McGuireWoods LLP. Both handle employment litigation on behalf of employers, and advise companies on employment issues regularly.
posted on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 10:22 AM by Lou Michels

Unbalanced

Because of its requirement to evaluate each employment situation on an individual basis, the Americans with Disabilities Act frequently provides its own unusual subset of employment discrimination decions. The Seventh Circuit recently delved into the issue of whether an inability to stand on one leg qualified as a disability within the law.

The plaintiff broke his back in several places falling out of a tree stand while hunting. Following a lengthy recovery, he was limited to lifting no more than 50 pounds and could not stand for long periods or balance himself on one leg (in seeking to demonstrate his balancing problems as a substantial impairment of a major life activity, the plaintiff apparently reported to the court that he had to hold on to something to put his pants on). His employer assigned him to light duty work as an accommodation. He was ultimately terminated for starting an unfounded and problematic rumor about the employer's personnel policies. He sued claiming that he was fired because of his disabled condition.

The Seventh Circuit quickly refined the claim down to whether plaintiff was "substantially limited" in his ability to stand as a result of his injuries. Recognizing that conditions like excess weight and back pain restrict the ability to stand for many people, the court noted "persons impaired by virtue of common afflictions cannot be disabled." The court stated that plaintiff was able to stand for 30 to 40 minutes at a time, which was not a substantial limitation. Nor was the inability to balance on one leg a disabling condition. "It is simply far from obvious that the average person needs to balance on one leg on a routine basis so as to stand."

In other words, the court took a very common sense approach to the analysis of these alleged disabilities. People function relatively well with a variety of back, joint and other physical ailments. The Seventh Circuit is saying here that the ADA reserves its protections for more atypical situations.

And you can thank me later for not making one of several dozen puns possible on this storyline.

Comments