Americans with disabilities act. Apply to cashiers?

[duster1979]

Originally Posted by wethepeeps

Incorrect, also applies to job applicants. If the girl requests an accomodation it must be considered via the "interactive process" Attorneys are normally not involved in the hiring process. It is mid level managers. You would be suprised as to how many "educated higher level" supervisors do not know a thing about ADA. Let's not forget that many states have their own Discrimination laws that are handled separately from the Federal Act and often give wider protections to employees. Courts are now looking less at "who is considered disabled under the law and more to whether or not disabilty actually occurred. The ADAAA amendments that went into effect a few years ago have modified the Act in certain phases.

You miss my point.

An example of a "reasonable accommodation" would be allowing a cashier to sit on a stool when not actively checking out customers. So if the sole responsibility of the cashier was to check out customers at the register the employer would be compelled to allow this.

But the point of my post is that, if the responsibilities spelled out for the cashier position included other activities such as stocking shelves, customer carryouts, or climbing ladders to change light bulbs, and no reasonable accommodation could be made to allow the applicant to perform any of these functions, then there is nothing to compel the employer to hire that applicant.

And as far as the lawyers not being involved in the hiring process: No, they are not physically present at the interview, and they don't generally approve applicants before they are hired. But go to https://hyveenet.hy-vee.com/hyveenet...Stock_web_.pdf to see a cashier position with a Midwestern retailer. Any applicant would have to sign this form to affirm that he or she could perform all of those duties with a reasonable accommodation. If there are tasks listed that the applicant can't perform even with accommodation then the applicant doesn't get hired, period. This form was prepared by a lawyer, not a "mid level manager." And rest assured that these retailers make it a point to retain attorneys who are fully aware of all pertinent federal, state, and local codes regarding disabled employees.

Employees who become disabled after they are hired are sometimes handled a little differently. Someone who has already proven to be proficient in facets of a job that can be performed with an accommodation might be allowed to perform only those functions. But hiring somebody with the idea that they would only have to do part of the job would be risky as you really wouldn't no whether they could perform the task well or not, and if they couldn't you'd be stuck with an employee that you couldn't use and couldn't let go for fear of legal repercussions.

[mizzourah2006]

Originally Posted by duster1979

I sincerely doubt that WalMart and their team of corporate lawyers are "naive" about ADA.

My Big Box had multiple pages spelling out what tasks might be required for every position in the store, I'm sure that WalMart and the other major retailers have the same.

Yup, Walmart cashiers are required to condition/zone aisles throughout their shift as well. This would require frequent movement throughout the store. Which may make it difficult for her to perform.

I'm also pretty sure there are physical activities that must be performed as well. I had a friend that worked for them and I believe there was a weight lifting threshold as well. Something like must be able to lift 25-30 lbs. That would probably be very difficult for her to perform as well.

[wethepeeps]

Ok, I suppose I miss many points, but the essential function of the job is mainly checking out customers at the register. You do not have to be able to do every aspect of the job in order to be able to be given an accomodation. Job-restructuring is an option and should it make a difference whether the employee was a disabled person after they are hired. LEt the court's figure that out, but the idea of the ADA was to assist disabled in order to "obtain" a job and for those disabled after to "retain" their job.

[mizzourah2006]

Originally Posted by wethepeeps

Ok, I suppose I miss many points, but the essential function of the job is mainly checking out customers at the register. You do not have to be able to do every aspect of the job in order to be able to be given an accomodation. Job-restructuring is an option and should it make a difference whether the employee was a disabled person after they are hired. LEt the court's figure that out, but the idea of the ADA was to assist disabled in order to "obtain" a job and for those disabled after to "retain" their job.

I've seen the Walmart Cashier job description. Blocking/Zoning aisles is most definitely listed as an essential function of the job.

When I worked at a grocery store blocking/zoning was given to particular people who were given 4 hours an evening to do this. This job does not exist at Walmart. Cashiers are expected to do this when not busy up front. It is an essential function of their job.

[duster1979]

Originally Posted by wethepeeps

Ok, I suppose I miss many points, but the essential function of the job is mainly checking out customers at the register.

The essential function of any job is whatever the employer says it is. Go ahead and click on the link I posted; this is for an actual checker position in a grocery store. Operating the cash register is listed 7th under primary responsibilities, below "securing products that are out of reach" and "loading or unloading heavy items." And page 3 even lists the skills that can be accommodated.

You do not have to be able to do every aspect of the job in order to be able to be given an accomodation.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. You do need to be able to do every aspect of the job with an accommodation; if you can't perform some aspect even with an accommodation then you aren't eligible. The ADA doesn't require employers to exempt applicants from job duties, and I doubt that any state or local code would do this, either.

Job-restructuring is an option and should it make a difference whether the employee was a disabled person after they are hired.

And I mentioned this, but the key word is "after." A proven cashier who was a valued employee would likely be retained if a disability rendered him or her unable to perform certain duties, but I don't think anything compels a company to restructure a position for a disabled applicant.

LEt the court's figure that out, but the idea of the ADA was to assist disabled in order to "obtain" a job and for those disabled after to "retain" their job.

I agree, but it must be understood that obtaining and retaining employment are two different things and are handled differently both by employers and the ADA.

[aquilegia]

I have been told by job counselors in voc rehab to not mention one's disability or need for accommodation until after the job offer has been made, in order to not be discriminated against in the hiring process and have it be unacknowledged (or denied) by the employer for other so-called "reasons."

However, that only works for people with hidden disabilities or for whom an accommodation would not be apparent. Since this woman has already revealed to her local Walmart her disability and need for accommodation, this is no longer an option for her.

As for the employer being able to use discretion for restructuring the job if they liked the employee who then became disabled, that smacks of unfair play. If they still had the person on the job at the time of the disability, it seems to me they either need to restructure the job or not, per the ADA requirements, regardless of how well they "liked" the employee. As for whether it is an applicant or existing employee does not seem like there should be a difference. This would discriminate against the disabled in ever getting hired for plenty of jobs.

I hope she will pursue this. She should have access to State Voc Rehab workers who can help her navigate the job market and advise her as to how to handle this situation legally.

Anyone going up against Walmart probably won't have an easy time of it, but we need people to do so. Walmart employs a huge number of people, and displaces workers from other retailers when Walmart comes into a city and out-competes those other retailers. They need to be held accountable for fair hiring.

Best wishes to her. Go get em.

[bobtn]

Originally Posted by mizzourah2006

I'm also pretty sure there are physical activities that must be performed as well. I had a friend that worked for them and I believe there was a weight lifting threshold as well. Something like must be able to lift 25-30 lbs. That would probably be very difficult for her to perform as well.

I believe you are correct if memory serves me. My niece worked there about 14 years ago, she is now a lawyer (not employment), and back than, per her job description, she'd of course have to lift stff like dry dog food bags that would weigh a few dozen pounds, and were long.