[ADA Arguments] Jolene, ABC Corporation's Human Resources Manager, was encountering a rush of requests under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Cindy, a receptionist, was having a birthday and turning 50. She told Jolene that, while she had not been to see a physician, she had "the blues" and needed to take every Friday off for the next few weeks to recuperate. Cindy said that while she was able to engage in her normal activities, her energy level was down. Jolene promptly denied her request on the basis that the act only applies to physical disabilities. Another employee, Zeke, asked for a private office. Jolene asked him why he needed a private office. Zeke, who had been significantly burned, replied that while nothing was physically wrong with him, he was tired of everyone treating him as if he had a disability. He said that the treatment he received from coworkers interfered with his everyday life and work activities. Jolene denied his request explaining to him that he needed an actual documented physical disability before being covered by the act. Finally, Keanu, who had undergone knee surgery, asked that Jolene put in another elevator near his workstation. Jolene explained that workstation could be moved nearer to the existing elevator, but Keanu told her that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, she did not have the right to dictate his workstation location to him. Nevertheless, Jolene denied his request for a second elevator, noting that no other employees needed a second elevator. Cindy, Zeke, and Keanu got together and decided to go directly to federal court and sue ABC Corporation under the Americans with Disabilities Act to challenge Jolene's decisions.
-Does ABC Corporation have any duty to provide Keanu with a second elevator, assuming Keanu can establish that he is covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act based on an actual physical disability?
A) Yes, ABC Corporation must grant Keanu's request regardless of cost, since Keanu is covered under the act with an actual physical disability.
B) No, ABC Corporation is not required to accommodate Keanu unless the act until his doctor certifies that he has reached maximum medical improvement and will not get any better.
C) No, ABC Corporation will likely not be required to put in the second elevator because under the act, an employee is not supposed to ask for any accommodation from the employer.
D) No, ABC Corporation will likely not be required to put in the second elevator because Keanu can move his workstation, and putting in a second elevator would probably be an undue hardship on the employer.
E) No, ABC Corporation will likely not have to put in a second elevator because it will not benefit other employees, and an employer only has to make a change to a building as an accommodation under the act if the change will benefit a substantial number of employees.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q71: When it is necessary to the performance
Q72: Which of the following acts prohibits an
Q73: [ADA Arguments] Jolene, ABC Corporation's Human Resources
Q74: Which of the following acts prohibits employers
Q75: In response to a plaintiff's prima facie
Q77: [ADA Arguments] Jolene, ABC Corporation's Human Resources
Q78: If a company has an at-will employee,
Q79: What was the result in the case
Q80: What initial burden does a plaintiff have
Q81: How does a plaintiff in an action
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents