Recently, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Feldman v. Olin Corporation, reversed a trial court’s decision and ordered that an employee with sleep apnea be allowed to take his disability discrimination case to trial. Some of the facts of the case are (1) the employee had a long diagnosed severe sleep apnea condition and presented evidence that the condition limited some of his activities; (2) the employee, with support from his doctor, asked that he be assigned to a position that did not require overtime work, and (3) there was some evidence that other positions did not require overtime, unlike the employee’s former job. The employer unsuccessfully argued that the employee was not disabled because his condition did not really adversely impact on him. The Court disagreed, stating:
Although Feldman’s doctor advised he could work 40 hours a week, he emphasized that this was only if Feldman was not assigned to work flex-time. The doctor believed that Feldman’s sleeping problems were substantial enough to make a change in schedule necessary. The fact that Feldman could have worked in some capacity during the day cannot be enough to overcome Feldman’s other medical evidence of sleeping problems. To hold otherwise would be akin to saying “that no one is disabled under the ADA unless the person is unable to work,” which would “render all the provisions in the ADA governing reasonable accommodations at work entirely empty of meaning.” Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch. Dist., 184 F.3d 296, 311 (3d Cir. 1999). Finally, even though some evidence indicates that Feldman is able to do things like go to movies and attend church, other evidence shows that Feldman has significantly reduced his social activities because of his pain and sleeping difficulties. The Court next rejected the employer’s argument that the ability to work overtime is an "essential function" of Feldman's employment, in light of record evidence going both ways on the issue, stating:
Notably, Olin concedes that overtime is not listed as a required job feature in the written job descriptions. Olin counters that it should not have to list a requirement that is required by all of its jobs, but Feldman points to evidence of some jobs that do specifically list mandatory overtime as a requirement in their written descriptions. Feldman has also furnished data indicating that overtime is rarely worked by bag house operators. On the other hand, Olin argues that the consequences of exempting bag house workers from overtime would be dire, as fires sometimes break out that require all essential personnel to work until the fires are put out, even if that requires overtime. There is evidence, in short, going both ways, and so we cannot conclude that overtime was an essential function of the bag house or adjustor positions." This case is important because it recognizes that an employer’s duty to accommodate is significant and may require a transfer to another available position, and one that may even be less rigorous.
