High Court to Decide if Ergonomic Injuries Are Disabling

April 25, 2001
The U.S. Supreme Court announced last week that it will examine the question of whether or not the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects workers\r\nwith repetitive motion illnesses.

Does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protect workers with repetitive motion illnesses, forcing employers to change the workplace so that the affected employees can still draw a paycheck?

The U.S. Supreme Court announced last week that it will examine this question, reviewing a lower court decision that could have enormous implications for American companies because of the large number of workers who are suffering from repetitive motion illnesses.

The 1991 law defines "disability" as a physical or mental impairment that "substantially limits one or more of the major life activities." Companies are required by the ADA to make "reasonable accommodations" for disabled workers, provided this does not pose an "undue hardship" on the employer.

According to Leslie Rosenbaum, attorney for Ella Williams, his client developed carpal-tunnel syndrome and tendinitis while working on an assembly line at Toyota Motor Corp.''s Georgetown, Ky. plant.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati ruled last year that because Williams was impaired substantially from performing manual tasks she was entitled to the protection of the ADA. Toyota appealed the decision, and now the Supreme Court has agreed to review the case.

The desire to clarify the vexing issue of just what is a disability in the eyes of the law, is one of the reasons the Supreme Court decided to hear this case, according to Washington, D.C., lawyer Stewart Manela, a partner at the law firm Arent Fox.

"You have a division in the federal courts of appeals over what constitutes a disability," said Manela, who specializes in labor and employment law.

Toyota spokesman Jim Wiseman has a similar take on the case. "We felt we did everything we could do to reasonably accommodate her," said Wiseman. "We simply are asking the nation''s highest court to clarify the intent of the ADA."

Background Facts

Williams went to work for Toyota in 1990 and, according to Rosenbaum, she developed carpal-tunnel syndrome within months, filed a worker''s compensation claim and settled a law suit with Toyota that allowed her to return to work at a less physically demanding job doing quality-control inspections.

She worked at this job for three years, until 1996 when Toyota asked her to do the same type of work rotation that her co-workers were doing. Toyota lawyer Jeffrey Savarise said Williams volunteered for the job rotation, which was to last for less than a week, so she would be eligible for promotion.

According to the federal court of appeals, the new task required Williams "to grip a block of wood with a sponge attached to the end and wipe down the passing cars with a highlight oil at the rate of approximately one car per minute." In addition, this new work required Williams to keep her hands and arms up around shoulder height repetitively over several hours.

Savarise said company ergonomists had determined that Williams could perform the new task without aggravating her previous condition, but her ligament and muscle problems reappeared in a more severe form as a result of the new job, with tendinitis now in her shoulders and neck.

Williams asked for her previous job back and according to her Toyota refused, but the automaker disputes this.

Whatever the truth is, the case does raise the question posed by Rosenbaum: "They accommodated her disability previously, so why didn''t they let her continue doing that work?" It may be a question that also arises for Toyota stockholders who take a look at the company''s legal bills, and the risks it faces if it loses.

According to Rosenbaum, if Williams prevails she is looking to collect back pay, damages for humiliation, pain, suffering, and even "front pay" if Toyota says they won''t take her back. Williams is not currently employed, he added.

"Her previous position was probably a very desirable job," explained Manela. "Toyota uses it to bring people back from workers'' comp. because it''s easy, but you don''t plant someone there permanently."

Pushing the ADA Envelope

Expanding the definition of a disability to include carpal-tunnel syndrome and tendinitis could have serious implications for American business. About 25,000 employees a year lose work time because of carpal-tunnel syndrome.

The Sixth Circuit majority determined that Williams'' carpal-tunnel syndrome and tendinitis "are analogous to having missing, damaged, or deformed limbs that prevent her from doing the tasks associated with certain types of manual assembly line jobs, manual product handling jobs, and manual building trade jobs." The court defined these jobs as those that require gripping of tools and repetitive work with hands and arms extended at or above shoulder levels for extended periods of time.

But a vigorous dissenting opinion argued there is little legal precedent for regarding such a "specific and partial limitation" as a disability.

Expanding the definition of who is disabled is just the way the law works, according to Manela, but it raises the possibility that the ADA is now covering many people Congress did not originally intend to protect. Manela said that already the two largest categories of disabilities with ADA protection are back impairments and emotional and psychiatric impairments.

The Toyota v. Williams case will be heard by the Supreme Court this fall.

by James Nash

About the Author

EHS Today Staff

EHS Today's editorial staff includes:

Dave Blanchard, Editor-in-Chief: During his career Dave has led the editorial management of many of Endeavor Business Media's best-known brands, including IndustryWeekEHS Today, Material Handling & LogisticsLogistics Today, Supply Chain Technology News, and Business Finance. In addition, he serves as senior content director of the annual Safety Leadership Conference. With over 30 years of B2B media experience, Dave literally wrote the book on supply chain management, Supply Chain Management Best Practices (John Wiley & Sons, 2021), which has been translated into several languages and is currently in its third edition. He is a frequent speaker and moderator at major trade shows and conferences, and has won numerous awards for writing and editing. He is a voting member of the jury of the Logistics Hall of Fame, and is a graduate of Northern Illinois University.

Adrienne Selko, Senior Editor: In addition to her roles with EHS Today and the Safety Leadership Conference, Adrienne is also a senior editor at IndustryWeek and has written about many topics, with her current focus on workforce development strategies. She is also a senior editor at Material Handling & Logistics. Previously she was in corporate communications at a medical manufacturing company as well as a large regional bank. She is the author of Do I Have to Wear Garlic Around My Neck?, which made the Cleveland Plain Dealer's best sellers list.

Nicole Stempak, Managing Editor:  Nicole Stempak is managing editor of EHS Today and conference content manager of the Safety Leadership Conference.

Sponsored Recommendations

March 13, 2025
Learn about the main differences between OHSAS 18001 and ISO 45001, and how ISO 45001 takes a proactive approach to prevent work-related incidents. Find out why businesses should...
March 13, 2025
Avetta is a leader in contractor management, and with over 15 years of industry experience, we can help you establish a robust contractor pre-qualification program that aligns...
March 13, 2025
EQT commits to supporting Avetta in its ongoing growth and innovation journey.
March 13, 2025
Learn OSHA workplace lighting requirements to enhance safety, productivity, and quality. Discover standards, compliance benefits, and risks of non-compliance.

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of EHS Today, create an account today!