SEARCH OHR


WHAT'S NEW?

User Forum
Occupational Health News
Updated Algorithms
Training Sessions
Most Recent Tracker

FEATURES

Find a Provider
Resources
Policy Guides
Tracker Journal
MRO Self-Assessment
Protocols/Algorithms
Job Postings
 

SOFTWARE SUPPORT

SYSTOC Software
User Forum
Contact Information
Training Sessions
E-mail Questions

ABOUT OHR

Our History
Mission Statement
Business Philosophy
Employment
What Clients Say
Staff Directory
Directions & Map

EXTERNAL LINKS

Ohio Employee Health Partnership
OHROnline Meetings
OHRHelp Meetings
OHR University
Adobe Reader
 

Occupational Health News Summaries  

Former FedEx Employee Wins ADA Award Appeal

[Posted 01/29/2008] A federal appellate court has upheld a $108,000 jury award to a deaf former FedEx package handler who did not receive proper accommodations for his disability according to federal law. The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals turned aside FedEx’s contentions that the punitive damages were too high and that its managers had put forward a good-faith effort to comply with the federal law. 

The court ruled that, based on the evidence produced at the trial of Ronald Lockhart’s suit alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the jury was thus entitled to find that FedEx higher management officials had acted reprehensibly with respect to Lockhart’s need for ADA accommodations. This decision upheld a lower court ruling by US District Judge William D. Quarles, Jr. of the US District Court for the District of Maryland that awarded Lockhart $8,000 in compensatory damages and a $100,000 punitive damage total.

Writing for the court, Circuit Judge Robert King said FedEx was accused of ADA violations for not providing Lockhart a sign-language interpreter at employee meetings and training sessions, including sessions after September 11, 2001 about stepped-up security measures and potential anthrax exposure. Lockhart worked at the FedEx facility at Baltimore-Washington International Airport.

Although Lockhart suffered no physical harm from the actions complained of, his supervisors at FedEx were plainly indifferent to the fact that their failure to accommodate his disability could jeopardize his safety, and potentially implicate the safety of others, King wrote. Because Lockhart was denied the ADA accommodations…he consistently missed updates about important subjects such as workplace safety, handling dangerous goods, interpreting hazardous labels, and potential anthrax exposure. Finally, Lockhart’s supervisors were familiar with the mandate of the ADA and perceived the risk that their conduct was unlawful.

Related Links:
4th Circuit Ruling

Return to News Summary Page:
Occupational Health News Summaries

 

 

   

Home | Contact Information | E-mail Us