The New Jersey Employment Law Firm Blog
Federal and New Jersey employment laws protect employees and job applicants from disability discrimination. Disability discrimination encompasses refusing to hire or firing someone because of a disability, providing different pay or other forms of compensation due to a disability, or refusing to provide reasonable accommodations that would enable an individual with a disability to perform their job duties. The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in a case alleging disability discrimination in compensation, specifically employer-sponsored health insurance, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. The allegedly discriminatory act did not affect the plaintiff until after she had retired. The court ruled that she was no longer an “employee” as defined by the ADA and did not have standing to file a lawsuit.
The ADA states that employers may not “discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to… employee compensation” and other matters. The statute defines a “qualified individual” as someone who can “perform the essential functions” of a job the person “holds or desires,” either without assistance or with reasonable accommodations. The meaning of the words “holds or desires” was at the center of the Supreme Court case.
The plaintiff in Stanley v. City of Sanford began working as a firefighter for a city fire department in 1999. She was diagnosed with a chronic illness in 2016, and as a result had to retire from the fire department in 2018 after approximately nineteen years on the job.
When the city hired the plaintiff in 1999, it offered subsidized health insurance until the age of 65 to retirees in two groups:
– Individuals who retired after at least 25 years with the department; and
– Individuals who retired after less than 25 years because of a disability.
The city changed this policy in 2003 as follows:
– Individuals who retired after 25 or more years were still eligible for subsidized health insurance until age 65;
– Individuals who retired earlier because of a disability were only eligible for subsidized health coverage for 24 months after retirement.
Thus, the plaintiff did not meet the criteria for subsidized healthcare coverage until age 65 because her illness forced her to retire early. Her eligibility for subsidized coverage ended in 2020. She filed suit against the city, alleging that it violated the ADA by providing different healthcare coverage benefits to retirees based partly on disability.
The district court dismissed her lawsuit. It agreed with the city’s argument that the plaintiff did not have standing to sue because she was not a “qualified individual” under the ADA. The Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling, and the plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court rulings. The decision was largely based on the ADA’s use of the present tense in its definition of “qualified individual.” The words “holds or desires,” the court held, indicate that ADA protections apply to people who have a job or are seeking one at the time of the alleged discrimination. As a retiree, the plaintiff no longer fell under the ADA.
The court distinguished the ADA from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That statute has no “temporal qualification,” so it can protect former employees in some situations.
Employees and job seekers in New Jersey and New York may be able to claim compensation if an employer has engaged in unlawful disability discrimination. The knowledgeable and skilled employment lawyers at the Resnick Law Group are available to offer advice and advocacy. Please contact us at 973-781-1204 or online today to schedule a confidential consultation with a member of our team.