Alcoholic truck driver deemed "disabled" under ADA

Gary F said:
Apparently at least these guys have.

http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-07-25/news/wheelchairs-of-fortune/full

http://overlawyered.com/2005/03/ada-filing-mills-drive-by-lawsuits/

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4183/is_20070904/ai_n19499568/
Click to expand...

Which ought to tell you how many employers are either ignorant of, or perfectly willing to break, the law.

Not very reassuring.

Pretty much all the ADA requires, speaking generally, is that "reasonable accomodations" be made for an employee with a disability. Anything resulting in a cost to the business is pretty much per se unreasonable, and thus not illegal.

But flat-out canning a person for a medical reason, when there is no connection or effect to the business, isn't allowed.

Seems pretty fair to me. You know, considering employers' proven track record of treating employees fairly.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Which ought to tell you how many employers are either ignorant of, or perfectly willing to break, the law.

Not very reassuring.
Click to expand...
Not all business owners can keep up with the multitude of government regulations.
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Pretty much all the ADA requires, speaking generally, is that "reasonable accomodations" be made for an employee with a disability. Anything resulting in a cost to the business is pretty much per se unreasonable, and thus not illegal.

But flat-out canning a person for a medical reason, when there is no connection or effect to the business, isn't allowed.

Seems pretty fair to me. You know, considering employers' proven track record of treating employees fairly.
Click to expand...
What's reasonable? The things judges and lawyers consider reasonable is often way out of sync with almost everybody else, but that has been very profitable for the legal profession.
 
The percentage of working-age Californians with jobs has fallen to a record low, and employment may not return to pre-recession levels until the second half of the decade, according to a research group.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...s-to-record-low-as-fewer-women-find-jobs.html

Well this should help.

But in California, the birthplace of the disability rights movement, critics say that a relative handful of professional litigants in wheelchairs, with help from savvy lawyers like Frankovich, have turned the ADA on its head. So-called "frequent filers" have done so, they say, by bringing lawsuits in "drive-by" fashion, extracting easy settlements from establishments — often small businesses — that fail to post handicapped signs or whose restroom grab bars are a few inches too high.
http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-07-25/news/wheelchairs-of-fortune/full
 
Gary F said:
Not all business owners can keep up with the multitude of government regulations.
Click to expand...

This isn't really a multitude of regulations. You just have to act decently towards an employee that has some kind of medical condition.

What's reasonable? The things judges and lawyers consider reasonable is often way out of sync with almost everybody else, but that has been very profitable for the legal profession.
Click to expand...

A good non-legalese way of defining reasonable behavior is "not behaving like a butthole."

I'm sorry, but firing an employee with an alcohol problem, when that alcohol problem does not affect work duties in any way that doesn't involve conjecture and when firing that employee is apparently contrary to your own policies (I haven't verified this), makes you a butthole.
 
Gary F said:
The percentage of working-age Californians with jobs has fallen to a record low, and employment may not return to pre-recession levels until the second half of the decade, according to a research group.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...s-to-record-low-as-fewer-women-find-jobs.html

Well this should help.

But in California, the birthplace of the disability rights movement, critics say that a relative handful of professional litigants in wheelchairs, with help from savvy lawyers like Frankovich, have turned the ADA on its head. So-called "frequent filers" have done so, they say, by bringing lawsuits in "drive-by" fashion, extracting easy settlements from establishments — often small businesses — that fail to post handicapped signs or whose restroom grab bars are a few inches too high.
http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-07-25/news/wheelchairs-of-fortune/full
Click to expand...

On the one hand, those kind of lawsuits are outrageous. No dispute.

But, should we give business owners that open businesses, without knowing the circumstances under which their businesses will be operating, a pass?

I'm just not particularly sympathetic to someone trying to make a profit off of the public who says "I didn't know what the public requires of me."

Of course, we were talking about firing employees with disabilities, which is a different part of the ADA.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
This isn't really a multitude of regulations. You just have to act decently towards an employee that has some kind of medical condition.



A good non-legalese way of defining reasonable behavior is "not behaving like a butthole."

I'm sorry, but firing an employee with an alcohol problem, when that alcohol problem does not affect work duties in any way that doesn't involve conjecture and when firing that employee is apparently contrary to your own policies (I haven't verified this), makes you a butthole.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but most non-lawyers do not see it that way. FWIW I still think that you are basically a good guy.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
I'm sorry, but firing an employee with an alcohol problem, when that alcohol problem does not affect work duties in any way that doesn't involve conjecture and when firing that employee is apparently contrary to your own policies (I haven't verified this), makes you a butthole.
Click to expand...
Also add an employee that was seeking out treatment too. A lot of hyperbole in this this thread about him driving drunk. There is no allegation or evidence that was happening. There is also a lot of ignoring that the employee was seeking treatment for his problem. Hence my comments about the lack of compassion. He obviously realized he had a problem and took personal responsibility to address the issue in accordance to what was reportedly the company policy. For that he was punished. So yeah, the company is acting like buttholes.
 
Here is an interesting excerpt:
In addition to the provisions about service dogs, the Department’s revised ADA regulations have a new, separate provision about miniature horses that have been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. (Miniature horses generally range in height from 24 inches to 34 inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 pounds.) Entities covered by the ADA must modify their policies to permit miniature horses where reasonable. The regulations set out four assessment factors to assist entities in determining whether miniature horses can be accommodated in their facility. The assessment factors are (1) whether the miniature horse is housebroken; (2) whether the miniature horse is under the owner’s control; (3) whether the facility can accommodate the miniature horse’s type, size, and weight; and (4) whether the miniature horse’s presence will not compromise legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation of the facility.

Who gets to decide this? Should somebody be able to bring one on an airliner? How about a pot belly pig?

Maria Tirotta Andrews, the pig’s owner, brought the 300-pound Vietnamese pot-bellied pig named Charlotte onto the Boeing 757 on Oct. 17, saying it was a therapeutic companion pet....
Andrews said she has a heart condition so severe that she needs the companionship of her pig to relieve stress.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=94861&page=1
 
Last edited:
Gary F said:
Here is an interesting excerpt:
In addition to the provisions about service dogs, the Department’s revised ADA regulations have a new, separate provision about miniature horses that have been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. (Miniature horses generally range in height from 24 inches to 34 inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 pounds.) Entities covered by the ADA must modify their policies to permit miniature horses where reasonable. The regulations set out four assessment factors to assist entities in determining whether miniature horses can be accommodated in their facility. The assessment factors are (1) whether the miniature horse is housebroken; (2) whether the miniature horse is under the owner’s control; (3) whether the facility can accommodate the miniature horse’s type, size, and weight; and (4) whether the miniature horse’s presence will not compromise legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation of the facility.
Click to expand...

The humanity. Where able, a business has to admit a service animal. This would apply to businesses operating out of a barn.

Who gets to decide this? Should somebody be able to bring one on an airliner? How about a pot belly pig?

Maria Tirotta Andrews, the pig’s owner, brought the 300-pound Vietnamese pot-bellied pig named Charlotte onto the Boeing 757 on Oct. 17, saying it was a therapeutic companion pet....
Andrews said she has a heart condition so severe that she needs the companionship of her pig to relieve stress.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=94861&page=1
Click to expand...

What's the difference between a dog and a pig? Why the one and not the other? Is one of those not "legitimate?"

Of course, none of this has anything to do with firing someone for seeking alcohol treatment. I totally think that it would be better to have someone who otherwise wants treatment for alcohol addiction to refrain from it in the name of keeping his job. That way, he could lose it when he kills someone with a DUI, and all of the conjecture in this thread might be true.
 
Gary F said:
Here is an interesting excerpt:
In addition to the provisions about service dogs, the Department’s revised ADA regulations have a new, separate provision about miniature horses that have been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. (Miniature horses generally range in height from 24 inches to 34 inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 pounds.) Entities covered by the ADA must modify their policies to permit miniature horses where reasonable. The regulations set out four assessment factors to assist entities in determining whether miniature horses can be accommodated in their facility. The assessment factors are (1) whether the miniature horse is housebroken; (2) whether the miniature horse is under the owner’s control; (3) whether the facility can accommodate the miniature horse’s type, size, and weight; and (4) whether the miniature horse’s presence will not compromise legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation of the facility.
Click to expand...

Holy crap, I'll be right over to the Fleet&Farm to pick up some tiedown rings and some buckets and horse-feed to accomodate our customers with service horses :hairraise: .
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Of course, none of this has anything to do with firing someone for seeking alcohol treatment.
Click to expand...

They fired him for not seeking the alcohol treatment accepted by the company.


Took a while for the federal goverment to get out of the business of funding drinkers (by eliminating substance abuse from the SSI-DI qualifying conditions). Companies shoul be that lucky.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Interesting that this subject is brought up now. I just spent an hour chatting with a guy who used to be the head of safety ops at a major airline, back in the '70s. (He's 88, now.)

The stories he told! (Flying a P-38 Lightning under all the bridges on the Sacramento River was one fun one!) The one that was pertinent to this thread, however, is this one:

He was called in on a day off because there was an emergency landing inbound to Houston. Two of their pilots, on a repositioning flight of a brand, new B-727, had gotten too low on an ILS approach, and hit...something. They didn't know what, and they were inbound with all equipment scrambling.

As they approached the field, they did a fly-by, past the tower, to assess the damage. Tower personnel were absolutely astounded to see a TELEPHONE POLE sticking out of the bottom of the plane!

The guys had sheared off a pole. When it broke off, it hit the ground, rebounded, entered the fuselage behind the main spar, and driven into the cargo hold by over 30 feet. The tip of the pole, still trailing wires, was sticking out the front/bottom of the plane!

Amazingly, they landed okay, although the plane was a total write-off. The pole had not hit a single major system in the aircraft, and the only thing that didn't work was the brakes. Luckily they had ample runway, and partial braking was good enough.

Our guy met the pilots in the elevator on their way up to see the chief pilot. Once the elevator door closed, he could smell the booze. These guys had gone straight from an all-night party to the flight deck!

He hit the "stop" switch, and confronted the pilots. They knew they were had.

They both admitted what they had done, and decided to save everyone the trouble by resigning on the spot. Both pilots submitted their resignations, and our hero agreed to say nothing further about the incident.

Then their union got involved. The pilots were convinced to file a grievance against the airline, and -- after a lengthy battle -- both were actually reinstated, at which time our story-teller tendered HIS resignation. As he put it, he wasn't going to be responsible for putting passengers at risk -- and these guys were clearly dangerous.

This argument has been going on for a long time. IMHO, whether you're flying a 727, or driving a big-rig, addiction to alcohol is a disqualifying condition.
Click to expand...

Your "friend" just spun a story of pure BS. If this had of happened there would be an NTSB filing.

It doesn't exist.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Your "friend" just spun a story of pure BS. If this had of happened there would be an NTSB filing.

It doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

You dont understand: in Texas, the power of unions extends into the goverment an allows them to make something minor like an NTSB report disappear.
 
weilke said:
You dont understand: in Texas, the power of unions extends into the goverment an allows them to make something minor like an NTSB report disappear.
Click to expand...


I'm sure of that. :rofl:

I spent 21 years on the B727 and I'm familiar with most accidents/incidents involving this make and model. This whole story reeks of BS.

There was a B727 that did impact the approach lights some years ago. They landed and had damage to the tail cone area. Perhaps Jay's buddy decided to embellish the story to entertain himself.
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
I spent 21 years on the B727 and I'm familiar with most accidents/incidents involving this make and model. This whole story reeks of BS.
Click to expand...

You can admit it, you were the FE on that flight and the only one barely sober enough to drive everyone home that night :wink2: .
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
What's the difference between a dog and a pig? Why the one and not the other? Is one of those not "legitimate?"
Click to expand...
About 240 lbs. The smaller animal that can accomplish the task would be preferable. As a physician I can attest that a pig offers no benefit for the treatment of "a heart condition so severe that she needs the companionship of her pig to relieve stress". If you paid for a first class ticket would rather share the space with a golder retriever or a 300 lb pot belly pig?

The concept behind the ADA is a noble one. The implementation is evidence of the absurdity of those who write the regulations.
 
What happens when someone wants to bring a companion animal on board and someone else claims they are allergic? :devil:
 
weilke said:
They fired him for not seeking the alcohol treatment accepted by the company.
Click to expand...
Where did that information come from?

Looking a the OP link it, I could not find such a claim. I did see this
The company suspended him from his driving position, which paid him nearly $22 per hour, including benefits. In compliance with U.S. Transportation Department regulations, Grams met with a substance abuse professional who notified the company that Grams would participate in an outpatient treatment program and could return to work.
Click to expand...
. Which makes it seem like the treatment program was company sanctioned.
​
 
ScottM said:
Where did that information come from?

Looking a the OP link it, I could not find such a claim. I did see this
. Which makes it seem like the treatment program was company sanctioned.
Click to expand...

Right, but further down in the same article it states:

Grams then decided he couldn't afford treatment because he believed he would have to pay for it upfront and be reimbursed by his insurance company only if it approved the treatment. Instead, he joined [COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important][COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important]Alcoholics [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=inherit ! important][COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important]Anonymous[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. Old Dominion fired him in July for job abandonment.

I hate to rely on Fox news for information, but the story as reported is that he was offered reassignment to a non-driving position based on the assessment by the counselor and the promise to enter into a specific (probably outpatient) treatment program. When he didn't enroll in that program, the deal was off.

I dont know what the goverment wants from the company. Probably that they pay him 22/hr to sit at home and attend AA meetings until he gets better.
 
weilke said:
Right, but further down in the same article it states:

Grams then decided he couldn't afford treatment because he believed he would have to pay for it upfront and be reimbursed by his insurance company only if it approved the treatment. Instead, he joined [COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important][COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important]Alcoholics [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=inherit ! important][COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=inherit ! important]Anonymous[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. Old Dominion fired him in July for job abandonment.

I hate to rely on Fox news for information, but the story as reported is that he was offered reassignment to a non-driving position based on the assessment by the counselor and the promise to enter into a specific (probably outpatient) treatment program. When he didn't enroll in that program, the deal was off.

I dont know what the goverment wants from the company. Probably that they pay him 22/hr to sit at home and attend AA meetings until he gets better.
Click to expand...
I did read that. I read it three times trying to figure out exactly what it was saying. I do not think it is clear if AA was approved or not. I doubt by itself that it was. But the firing was for job abandonment. That appears to be from his leaving the part time lower paying gig that they gave him when he started seeking treatment. Since he also thought that he was paying up front and then getting reimbursed, with the lower hours and less pay he was now getting he was screwed in his mind. Remember too that the new job did not offer benefits like his driving position did.
 
The other day I was asked whether I know someone for a pilot position. The job involves multi-day trips in a GA plane. The owner of the company wants a non-smoker who doesn't drink and is easy to get along with. Double whammy I guess, he'll have the federal goverment up his a## on three counts, I bet being an antisocial prick is a protected federal category as well.
 
Everskyward said:
What happens when someone wants to bring a companion animal on board and someone else claims they are allergic? :devil:
Click to expand...

The same thing that would happen if a person tried to stop that dog/animal walking in a public place for a similar protected reason. They'd be told to deal with it.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
I'm sure of that. :rofl:

I spent 21 years on the B727 and I'm familiar with most accidents/incidents involving this make and model. This whole story reeks of BS.

There was a B727 that did impact the approach lights some years ago. They landed and had damage to the tail cone area. Perhaps Jay's buddy decided to embellish the story to entertain himself.
Click to expand...

I will be sure to let Captain A.J. High, renowned author and a man who taught himself to fly, know that an anonymous poster on PofA says he's full of bovine excrement... :rolleyes:
 
Doggtyred said:
The same thing that would happen if a person tried to stop that dog/animal walking in a public place for a similar protected reason. They'd be told to deal with it.
Click to expand...

Sooner or later, one of these service animals will cause a fatal allergic reaction in someone. Then we will have the fun of watching the ADA implode, as the Supreme Court struggles to figure out who is more entitled.

If someone showed up here with a 300 pound pig, claiming it to be a "service animal", I would summarily show them the door. :rolleyes:
 
Jay Honeck said:
Sooner or later, one of these service animals will cause a fatal allergic reaction in someone. Then we will have the fun of watching the ADA implode, as the Supreme Court struggles to figure out who is more entitled.
Click to expand...

I doubt that a single death would bring about the end of ADA. This is such a good welfare program for underemployed lawyers, there would be plenty of institutional resistance to getting rid of it even if people realized what a scam it has become.

If someone showed up here with a 300 pound pig, claiming it to be a "service animal", I would summarily show them the door. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

....and likely loose your business over it.

You'll never get sued by the guy with a legit disability who can't reach your toilet paper roll. You get sued by the professionals who have turned their marginal disability into a money earning lifestyle.
 
Does it qualify for handicapped license plates? That could be handy so he could park close to the bar door so he doesn't have to stagger too far when going home afterward.
 
flyingron said:
Does it qualify for handicapped license plates? That could be handy so he could park close to the bar door so he doesn't have to stagger too far when going home afterward.
Click to expand...

It does, they are pink. It also comes with a special drivers license in a upright form-factor.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
I'm sure of that. :rofl:

I spent 21 years on the B727 and I'm familiar with most accidents/incidents involving this make and model. This whole story reeks of BS.

There was a B727 that did impact the approach lights some years ago. They landed and had damage to the tail cone area. Perhaps Jay's buddy decided to embellish the story to entertain himself.
Click to expand...

Late to this thread, but ... agreed. The WW2 guys (I assume the storyteller was one of those), did everything outsize, including the telling of tall stories. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top