Furthermore, the intention behind the ADA was for such disability employment cases to be analyzed on a case-by-case analysis, however courts have instead opted instead for a more generalized judgement.

The Courts' Judgement on Absenteeism

Many courts have ruled that presence is an essential function of employment, which considering many people cannot meet without the necessary accommodations, has turned the matter of absenteeism into a rule of law - siding in favor of employers experiencing “undue hardship” as such rather than disabled workers.

University of Notre Dame

While the ADA has instituted protections toward the job security of people with disabilities, courts’ differing interpretations of the act’s protections against those needing and seeking accommodations, especially those with chronic or unpredictable disabilities. 

ADA Loopholes and Limitations

Includes court cases that used the ADA as the basis of supporting evidence for arguments, cases that changed/amended the ADA, cases that defined definitions, and more. 

Court Cases Regarding the ADA in the United States 

Rosenberger, M. G. (2001). Absenteeism and the ADA: The Limits and the Loopholes. Catholic University Law Review, 50(4), 957–975. 

Absenteeism and the ADA: The Limits and the Loopholes 

ADA Rulings: Presence as an Essential Function

This case questions what the proper standard under the ADA is when determining if an individual is substantially limited in performing manual tasks. 

Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc., v. Williams (2002)

Ronald Yeskey was sentenced to a 18-36 month stay in prison and got recommended to participate in a Motivational Boot camp available for first time offenders; the purpose of the boot camp was that it would grant Yeskey parole after 6 months. The Department of Corrections refuse his acceptance into the camp once discovering he had a history of hypertension, to which Yeskey claimed as discriminatory and brought it to the courts. 

Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey (1998)

The issue examined in this case was whether the ADA requires a professional sports organization (the PGA) to make modifications for a participant with a disability.

PGA Tour V. Martin (2001)

This case decided the question if corrective and mitigating measures should be considered when determining whether an individual is disabled under the ADA.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After