The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines “disability” as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity. The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) clarified that the ADA’s definition of disability is to be construed broadly to protect the individuals asserting claims under the ADA. Nearly two decades after the ADAAA, employers are still struggling with what a disability is and how to address misconduct related to a disability.
In a complaint filed against the Flagstaff Unified School District, a former employee sued the district for alleged disability discrimination, claiming the misconduct she was terminated for was connected to her disability. How can employers manage misconduct in the workplace when employees claim the misconduct was caused by a known disability?
Setting The Scene
Holly Jones alleged that she suffers from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). She submitted a request to the district for accommodation, specifically requesting no change in curriculum and help with technology. The district engaged in the interactive process and offered accommodation for the school year. Her request for accommodation was submitted around the same time she was being investigated for certain conduct her colleagues complained about. Her accommodation wasn’t put in place.
The colleagues’ complaints stemmed from Jones’ excessively calling, texting, and emailing them despite their requests that she stop. The district directed her to stop, but she violated that order, resulting in a five-day suspension without pay. In response to the disciplinary action, she began to email the district superintendent excessively.
Jones was again directed to discontinue her communications and was told that further misconduct would result in disciplinary action. Again, she disregarded the directive, and her employment was ultimately terminated.
Termination ‘Because of’ Her Disability
Jones sued the district for unlawful termination in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. To succeed on her unlawful termination claim, she needed to prove that she’s disabled within the meaning of the law, she’s a qualified individual capable of performing her essential job functions with or without reasonable accommodation, and she was terminated because of her disability. The court determined that the only element at issue was whether she was terminated because of her ADHD.
The district argued the evidence overwhelmingly established Jones was terminated for a well-documented pattern of unprofessional conduct and insubordination. She didn’t dispute that she engaged in the conduct that led to her termination. Instead, she argued her behavior was a manifestation of her ADHD, so the district’s termination because of misconduct constituted termination because of her ADHD.
Conduct Resulting From a Disability
The court ruled that, according to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all Arizona employers), established case law provides that “with few exceptions, conduct resulting from a disability is considered to be part of the disability, rather than a separate basis for termination.” If a termination is based in part on this conduct, it’s based on the disability and not considered a separate basis for termination.
That being said, the court noted that Jones failed to provide sufficient evidence the misconduct she was terminated for was caused by her ADHD. Although she relied on a note from her physician, the court said she needed more evidence to explain how those behaviors resulted from her ADHD. Because she failed to do so, the court granted the district’s request for judgment in its favor and dismissed the case.
Why Did I Tell You All of This?
Requests for ADA accommodations for mental impairments are on the rise. The requests are often accompanied by misconduct an employee could later attribute to mental impairment, resulting in a claim that the employer took an adverse action because of a disability. Once on notice of a mental impairment, you must take extra care when disciplining employees for misconduct that could be attributed to a disability. When in doubt, you should seek the aid of competent employment counsel to accommodate a request for mental impairment or proceed with disciplinary action on conduct that may be attributed to the (known) mental impairment.
Jodi R. Bohr is a shareholder with Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., and a contributor to Arizona Employment Law Letter. She practices employment and labor law, with an emphasis on counseling employers on HR matters, litigation, and workplace investigations. She may be reached at jrb@tblaw.com or 602-255-6082.