The Americans with Disabilities Act’s employment protections only extend to individuals with disabilities who can perform the essential functions of their jobs. And when it comes to deciding which functions are “essential,” courts continue to defer to employers’ judgment.
In Knutson v. Schwan’s Home Service, Inc., No. 12-2240, (April 3, 2013), the U.S. 8th Circuit accepted the employer’s written job description as evidence that it was “essential” for dock managers to receive U.S. Department of Transportation driving certification, even though driving isn’t part of a manager’s regular duties.
Facts of the Case
Jeffrey D. Knutson worked for Schwan’s Home Service, Inc. as a general manager of a delivery truck depot. Schwan’s delivers frozen food to homes and offices. Managers’ job descriptions require them to “meet the Federal Department of Transportation eligibility requirements, including appropriate driver’s license and corresponding medical certification.”
Knutson occasionally drove trucks to train new drivers, but last did so in November 2007.
In March 2008, he suffered an eye injury that required surgery. Upon returning to work, he was required to complete a fitness-for-duty exam. He failed the exam and Schwan’s placed him on leave. The employer gave him 30 days to obtain recertification or earn a job at Schwan’s that did not require DOT certification. He failed to do either and was fired.
He sued, alleging disability discrimination, but the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota granted summary judgment for Schwan’s, finding that Knutson was no longer qualified for the manager’s position.
Qualified Individual
To succeed on an ADA claim, an employee must show that he is a qualified individual. To do that, Knutson must be able to perform the essential functions of his job with or without accommodation. EEOC regulations define essential functions as “the fundamental job duties of the employment position” (29 C.F.R. §1630.2).
In the 8th Circuit, other factors to consider in the essential function determination include: (1) the employer’s judgment as to which functions are essential; (2) written job descriptions prepared before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job; (3) the amount of time spent on the job performing the function; (4) the consequences of not requiring the incumbent to perform the function; and (5) the current work experience of incumbents in similar jobs, the court said, citing Kammueller v. Loomis, Fargo & Co., 383 F.3d 779, 786 (8th Cir. 2004).
On appeal, Knutson argued that being certified to drive a delivery truck was not an essential function of his position because he had managed the depot successfully without driving.
Schwan’s countered that managers must be able to drive delivery trucks in case they are needed to deliver products or train new employees.
8th Circuit: Employee’s experience inconsequential
The court said that the employer’s judgment was entitled to deference. Knutson’s “specific personal experience is of no consequence in the essential functions equation,” the court said. “Instead, it is the written job description, the employer’s judgment, and the experience and expectations of all [managers] generally [that] establish the essential functions of the job.”
Because Knutson was not qualified to perform an essential function of his job and there was no reasonable accommodation that would render him qualified, he was not entitled to ADA’s protections, the 8th Circuit ruled, upholding summary judgment for Schwan’s.
Read the full story here.