* SUPREME COURT GUIDANCE ON ABILITY TO PERFORM MANUAL TASKS *

From: Cara Levinson
Email: CaraBLevinson@aol.com
Date: February 10, 2005

Comments

Sometimes in our rush to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities, we forget that not everyone who is disabled is considered disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In other words, there may be folks who are disabled for purposes of worker's compensation or who qualify for short-term disability pay, but are not entitled to reasonable accommodation under the ADA.

This point was made clearly by the United States Supreme Court in January 2002 in the "Toyota v. Williams" decision. Ella WIlliams was an autoworker whose carpal tunnel syndrome substantilly limited her ability to perform the range of manual tasks associated with an assembly line job. The Supreme Court eventually took up her case to decide a question on which the EEOC guidelines were silent: What must a plaintiff demonstrate to establish a substantial limitation in the specific major life activity of performing manual tasks?

The Court found that manual tasks unique to a particular job are not necessarily an important part of most people's lives. When it comes to manual tasks, the Court determined that a job-specific inquiry is insufficient. The Court noted that the performance of housefold chores and bathing and brushing one's teeth are the types of manual tasks that are of central importance to most people's lives. Williams could brush her teeth, bathe, tend her flower garden, fix breakfast, do laundry and pick up around the house. Because of her impairment, however, she could not sweep or dance, needed occasional hellp dressing, had to limit playing with her children, gardening and driving. On that record, the Court concluded that she was NOT substantially limited in the performance of the major life activity of manual tasks.

How does this decision impact your management of your employees? If you have an employee/applicant who is impaired in the ability to perform certain manual tasks, I recommend seeking an experienced employment law attorney's advice. After an individualized assessment of the impairment's effect on the individual's ability to perform "activities of central importance to most people's daily lives," you may find you do NOT need to accommodate the employee/applicant.

PLEASE NOTE: Although some attorneys have interpreted this decision more broadly to apply to all impairments, it is very clear that the Supreme Court was only referring to the ability to perform manual tasks.