BROAD CLASS OF JOBS
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations for Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are 29 C.F.R. Part 1630 and 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2 defines the broad class of jobs as it applies to the major life activity of working.
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2. Definitions.
(j)(3) With respect to the major life activity of working—(i) The term substantially limits means significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities. The inability to perform a single, particular job does not constitute a substantial limitation in the major life activity of working.
The Supreme Court has held that the broad class of jobs analysis is applicable only to the major life activity of working.
In Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471, 119 S.Ct. 2139 144 L.Ed.2d 450 (1999), the Supreme Court held that:
When the major life activity under consideration is that of working, the statutory phrase “substantially limits” requires, at a minimum, that plaintiffs allege they are unable to work in a broad class of jobs. Id. at 491.
In Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184, 122 S.Ct. 681, 151 L.Ed.2d (2002), the Supreme Court clarified its holding in Sutton that the broad class of jobs did not apply to any major life activity other than working.
In reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the Supreme Court held that:
The Court of Appeals relied on our opinion in Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc. for the ideal that a “class” of manual activities must be implicated for an impairment to substantially limit the major life activity of performing manual tasks. But Sutton said only that “[w]hen the major life activity under consideration is that of working, the statutory phrase ‘substantially limits’ requires that … plaintiffs allege that they are unable to work in a broad class of jobs.” … But Sutton did not suggest that a class-based analysis should be applied to any major life activity other than working. Nor do the EEOC regulations. In defining “substantially limits,” the EEOC regulations only mention the “class” concept in the context of the major life activity of working. 29 C.F.R. § 1630.j(3) (2001) (“With respect to the major life activity of working, the term substantially limits means significantly limited in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities”). Nothing in the text of the Act, our previous opinions, or the regulations suggests that a class-based framework should apply outside the context of the major life activity of working.” (emphasis in original)(citations omitted) Id, at 199-200.
Therefore, court decisions that have applied the broad class of jobs analysis to asthma and other respiratory disabilities are contrary to the ADA Title I regulations, Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc. and Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams.
The statutes and regulations cited above can be accessed at http://www.law.cornell.edu
DISCLAIMER: The content contained on this website has been prepared by GASP of Texas as a service to its readers and the Internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice. GASP of Texas has used reasonable efforts in collecting, preparing and providing quality information and commentary, but does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, adequacy or currency of the information contained on or linked to the Website. Users of information from the Website or links do so at their own risk.
Download this page as a Microsoft Word document
|