FREE Subscription to Consulting Magazine!
Powered by MaxBlogPress  

Supreme court to hear recovered drug addict ADA issue

October 9, 2003

Findlaw (Christian Science Monitor) reports: “Limits of disability act tested”

“Would a company that refuses to rehire somebody who says he’s overcome his drug and alcohol addiction be guilty of violating the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)?”

“That is the question the US Supreme Court takes up Wednesday in an Arizona case involving Hughes Missile Systems Company in Tucson with major implications for companies with zero-tolerance hiring and firing policies.”

An employee tested positive for cocaine and resigned in lieu of being fired. Two and a half years later, he applied for another job at the company after completing a rehabilitation program.

The company refused to consider him for hiring, under an unwritten policy of refusing to rehire anyone fired for misconduct. He was treated the same as any other employee who had used drugs, company lawyers say.

He says the company’s refusal to hire him is discrimination based on his past addiction in violation of the ADA.

A federal court judge dismissed the case. A federal appeals-court reversed.

The article nicely lays out the positions taken by the employee, employer, and government as amicus.


Recovered addicts, but not current users, are protected under the ADA. If the Court goes with the ADA’s intent, it seems the employee wins. But the employer’s argument that it has a neutral across-the-board disciplinary policy has some appeal too.

I think the government’s argument will tip the scale in favor of the employer. It says a ruling in favor of the employee “would undercut the effectiveness of workplace conduct rules, ‘which represent a legitimate effort by employers to promote workplace safety and productivity.’ ”





Related Posts


Supreme Court rules in Raytheon case, upholding no-rehire policy against ADA challenge

More on the Supreme Court’s Raytheon decision

Coca-Cola “cat’s paw” subordinate bias case dismissed on settlement week before Sup. Ct. arguments

Lively argument in casino makeup case

A political aside


`Sphere: Related Content`

George Lenard on General

comment Permalink



This entry was posted on Thursday, October 9th, 2003 at 9:38 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

If you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below.

(required)

(required)




George’s Employment Blawg is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!