By Cynthia McNabb and Kim Lowe
In Neal v. Indianapolis Fire Department, a District Court judge ruled that there was no merit to a claim by a former employee that he was discriminated against on the basis of his disability when he was terminated for poor attendance.
Sanjiv Neal suffered from anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) allegedly due to bullying and ostracization Neal experienced in training to be a firefighter. The bullying was, allegedly, at the hands of his supervisors and other trainees. These medical conditions caused Neal to be absent from work, including one month for outpatient addiction treatment, and to have difficulties working with others. Neal was terminated due to his unexcused absences.
Neal argued that Indianapolis Fire Department fired him because he was disabled and that it refused to offer him a reasonable accommodation as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The Fire Department responded that Neal was not protected from termination by the ADA because he was not qualified to do all the necessary job duties of a firefighter. Even if Neal was qualified, the IFD argued there was no reasonable accommodation for Neal because attendance is a required job function.
The judge agreed with the IFD’s argument, finding that Neal was not qualified under the ADA. The judge held that:
“Common sense provides that a firefighter must be at work to be able to respond to fires and other emergencies…The firefighting profession does not lend itself to remote work.”
Because regular attendance and working with coworkers, superiors, and members of the public are all essential functions of being a firefighter, and because the evidence demonstrated that Neal was still unable to regularly attend work or cooperate with others, the Court held that the Indianapolis Fire Department was legally allowed to terminate Neal.
The Fire Department’s conduct was legal even if it had failed to accommodate Neal because the IFD:
“had no obligation under the ADA to help Neal manage his anxiety, depression, or PTSD, and they had no obligation to assist Neal in seeking treatment…”
This case is in line with other cases finding that regular attendance is a valid job requirement for firefighters. Even if the reason for absence is a disability, fire departments do not have to tolerate or accommodate chronic unexcused absences. This case had an added component of Neal refusing to return to work upon being released for treatment, refusing calls and meetings with the Chief and general concern that he remained psychologically unfit for the position. In cases where your members are released from treatment after concern related to fitness for duty, it is essential that the employee follow-up regularly and be ready to return as soon as possible.
**Visit our Premium Website for more information on Disability Discrimination**
