Disability Discrimination

Disability discrimination can cause profound challenges for those who face unfair barriers in the workplace, housing, or public accommodations. Individuals in Scranton, Pennsylvania deserve fair treatment under the law, especially when disabilities become an unlawful reason for exclusion or mistreatment. At Polishan Solfanelli, our lawyers have substantial experience representing clients who encounter discriminatory practices, standing up for their rights and seeking appropriate remedies. Through diligent investigation and negotiation, our team strives to address each client’s unique circumstances and advocate for legal protections guaranteed under state and federal law. We are committed to helping clients navigate the complexities of the legal system, with the goal of resolving disputes and achieving just outcomes. Accurate guidance and personalized representation can help alleviate the burdens that often arise in these difficult situations. To discuss your disability discrimination concerns with Polishan Solfanelli, call 570-562-4520 and learn more about how we can support your legal interests.

Laws Prohibiting Disability Discrimination 

Disability discrimination is prohibited under both federal and Pennsylvania law. The primary federal statute is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which applies to private employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, and state and local governments that have 15 or more employees. In Pennsylvania, the Human Relations Act (PHRA) further expands these protections by covering employers with as few as four employees. In practical terms, the PHRA can at times extend protections to workers who might not be covered by federal law due to the lower employee threshold.

Both the ADA and the PHRA prohibit discrimination at every stage of employment, including hiring, promotion, compensation, training, termination, and other job-related activities. These laws additionally prohibit harassment and retaliation, ensuring that employees with disabilities can assert their rights without fear of punishment. The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) broadened the scope of who is considered disabled under federal law, making it easier for many people to qualify for legal protections.

When determining if an employer must comply with the ADA or the PHRA, it is important to remember that definitions of “employer” can be more involved than simply counting the number of regular staff members. In certain cases, affiliated business entities might be treated as a single employer if there is sufficient interrelation between their operations, management, or financial control. Therefore, individuals who believe that the ADA’s 15-employee threshold has not been met should still explore whether all related corporate relationships have been factored in.

A lawyer in Scranton, Pennsylvania can help individuals understand which laws may apply to a specific disability discrimination situation.

Local Ordinances in Pennsylvania 

Beyond federal and state law, some municipalities in Pennsylvania have enacted their own ordinances or maintain local commissions that enforce broader prohibitions against disability discrimination. Large cities, such as Philadelphia or Pittsburgh, may place additional obligations on employers, including lower employee coverage thresholds or expanded dispute resolution mechanisms. The Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance is an example of a local measure that extends protections to a broad range of individuals. Anyone who suspects discrimination should consider whether their city or town has passed legislation that can further protect their rights. These local rules often supplement the ADA and PHRA, thereby expanding remedies or clarifying employer responsibilities within those jurisdictions. A Scranton, Pennsylvania attorney can help you navigate local disability discrimination ordinances that may apply to your situation.

Definition of Disability and Qualified Individual 

Both the ADA and the PHRA employ a broad definition of disability. A person is considered disabled if they:

• Have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.
• Have a record of such an impairment (for instance, documentation or medical history showing a prior condition meeting the legal definition).
• Are regarded as having an impairment. This means the employer, or others in the workplace, perceive the person as having a limiting condition, even if the individual does not actually have the impairment or if it is not substantially limiting.

Major life activities include, but are not limited to, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. Under the ADAAA, the law emphasizes that this definition be interpreted broadly to encompass a wide array of conditions. This expanded view ensures that more individuals receive protection under federal law than in the past.

A key component for protection under these laws is that the person with a disability must also meet the qualification requirement for the role in question. In other words, the individual must be able to perform the essential functions of the position, with or without reasonable accommodation. Essential functions are the fundamental duties and responsibilities that define a position. Written job descriptions can be helpful in outlining these core tasks, but other factors—like the amount of time spent on each task and the consequences of not performing certain duties—are also relevant.

It is additionally significant that an employer’s perception of disability can trigger the “regarded as” prong of coverage. If an employer takes adverse action based on assumptions or stereotypes about an impairment—regardless of whether those assumptions are accurate or fair—that action can violate state and federal law if there is no legitimate, evidence-based justification for it.

Association with a Person with a Disability 

Both federal and state disability discrimination laws protect workers who have an association or relationship with an individual who has a disability. For instance, if an employer believes that an employee will frequently miss work due to caring for a disabled family member and takes adverse action on that assumption, this may constitute “association” discrimination. Employees should not be penalized because of their known relationship with a person who has a disability, whether it is a spouse, child, parent, or any other individual. These protections reflect the broader intent of anti-discrimination statutes to prevent bias based on disability, regardless of whether the bias is aimed at the employee directly or stems from another person’s condition.

The Interactive Process and Undue Hardship 

The interactive process is a collaborative exchange between employer and employee, intended to determine and implement reasonable accommodations enabling the employee to carry out essential job functions. Typically, this process starts when an employee requests an adjustment or assistance for a medical condition. An employer might also initiate the process if it is apparent that an accommodation might be needed, though the employer should do so in a way that respects the privacy of the individual and complies with both state and federal disability laws.

Effective engagement in the interactive process generally includes the following steps:

• Documentation and Communication: Both parties should maintain written records of requests, responses, and proposals connected to accommodations. This clarity helps ensure each side understands the other’s needs and constraints.
• Gathering Relevant Information: Employers may request documentation or medical information indicating the employee’s functional limitations, but only to the degree needed to confirm the disability and identify workable accommodations. Any medical records must be stored separately from general personnel files and treated as confidential.
• Considering Multiple Options: Employers are encouraged to explore various accommodation possibilities. If one option is not feasible, the employer should evaluate other potential solutions that do not pose an undue burden.
• Explaining Accommodation Decisions: If an employer decides a particular accommodation is not workable, the employee should be notified with a clear explanation. Transparency in this process reduces misunderstandings and confusion.

An accommodation request may be denied if it creates an undue hardship for the employer. Undue hardship signifies that the accommodation would cause significant difficulty or expense relative to the employer’s resources and operational structure. Considerations include the financial cost of the accommodation, its effect on business operations, and the overall financial standing of the employer. Although a smaller organization might more easily show undue hardship for a costly accommodation, employers are still expected to consider any less expensive or less disruptive alternatives before rejecting an accommodation request altogether.

Extended or Indefinite Leave as an Accommodation

While leaves of absence can often serve as a reasonable accommodation, the length and frequency of such leave may influence whether the employer can sustain it without suffering an undue hardship. An employee might require extended leave for a procedure, rehabilitation, or ongoing therapy. At times, repeated absences can become burdensome, especially if the requested leave is indefinite or if the employer lacks the resources to provide coverage during the repeated absences. Generally, shorter or well-defined leaves are more likely to be considered reasonable, whereas extended or open-ended leave can present complications that might lead to an undue hardship analysis. It is incumbent upon the employer to balance the operational needs of the workplace against the employee’s documented medical requirements; nonetheless, no employer should summarily deny a leave request without exploring potential solutions first. If you have questions about the interactive process or what constitutes undue hardship, you may wish to consult with an attorney in Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Direct Threat and Medical Examinations 

In some circumstances, an employer may believe that a worker with a disability poses a direct threat to health or safety. Under the ADA and the PHRA, an employer can lawfully exclude a person from employment if that individual’s condition would create a significant risk of substantial harm to themselves or others, and if no reasonable accommodation can sufficiently mitigate that risk. Such an exclusion must rely on current, objective medical evidence or a careful, fact-specific evaluation of the individual’s capability to perform essential duties. Mere conjecture or generalizations about certain medical conditions are not sufficient to justify restricting an employee’s ability to work.

When it comes to medical exams and disability-related queries, federal and state regulations outline clear restrictions:

• Before Making a Conditional Job Offer: An employer generally should not require medical examinations or ask questions that may disclose a disability.
• After a Conditional Offer but Before Employment Begins: An employer may conduct medical exams if it does so for all applicants in the same job category. If the exam reveals a condition affecting the applicant’s ability to fulfill the role, the employer must determine if a reasonable accommodation would enable safe performance of essential tasks.
• During Employment: Medical exams must be job-related and consistent with business necessity. Employers can request such an exam if they have a valid concern about whether the employee can perform a vital job function or if the employee’s presence might endanger themselves or others. Any medical documentation obtained must remain confidential and separated from regular personnel files.

What Disability Discrimination Looks Like 

Disability discrimination can manifest in various forms. Recognizing these behaviors is a critical step in addressing them:

• Overt Adverse Actions: Refusing to hire, demoting, failing to promote, or terminating an individual because of a disability is discrimination, particularly if the employee can accomplish necessary job tasks with reasonable accommodation.
• Harassing Behavior: Frequent jokes, slurs, or ridicule directed at a person’s disability can foster a hostile work environment. Targeting someone’s need for assistive devices, medical leaves, or other supports may create intolerable working conditions.
• Denial of Reasonable Accommodations: Simply dismissing an employee’s request—without engaging in the interactive process or meaningfully exploring solutions—can infringe upon disability discrimination laws.
• Retaliation for Asserting Rights: If an employee files a complaint, requests accommodations, or otherwise exercises their rights, the employer is barred from punishing them with reduced hours, unfavorable shift changes, or any other prejudicial act.
• Subtle or Indirect Measures: Discrimination can also appear in more understated ways, such as withholding vital training or excluding a worker from networking events central to career growth. These tactics can deprive covered employees of professional development opportunities.

Proactive Employer Practices

Employers can adopt a series of measures to reduce the likelihood of discrimination disputes and to stay in compliance with federal and state law. Among these measures is periodically reviewing and updating job descriptions so that essential functions remain current. By providing clear, accurate descriptions, employers can offer targeted accommodations that address specific barriers to performance. Managers and human resources staff can also benefit from ongoing training on privacy rules, appropriate handling of medical information, and respectful treatment of employees with disabilities. Further, ensuring that accommodation policies are applied consistently across all individuals in similar roles promotes a workplace culture of inclusion and fairness.

If you have questions about workplace disability rights or believe you have encountered discrimination, a Scranton, Pennsylvania lawyer can help guide you through your options.

Reasonable Accommodations 

A reasonable accommodation is any change or adjustment to a job or work environment that enables a qualified individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of the position. Several types of accommodations can be implemented to level the playing field, allowing employees with disabilities to meet performance standards and access the same opportunities as their peers. Common types include:

• Adaptations to Physical Space: Installing ramps, widening doorways, raising or lowering desks, or modifying workspace layouts can benefit employees with mobility-related conditions.
• Assistive Technology: Screen-reading software, large-print work materials, speech recognition tools, or other adaptive aids can support employees whose impairments affect reading, typing, or other functions.
• Leave of Absence or Scheduling Flexibility: Employees might require a leave of absence for treatments or recovery. Adjusting schedules to accommodate medical appointments or provide telework options can also be a viable solution for those experiencing periodic flare-ups of chronic conditions.
• Reassignment to a Vacant Position: If an employee cannot continue in their current role due to disability-related limitations, a transfer to a vacant role for which they are qualified may be a suitable alternative.
• Modification of Training Materials or Workplace Policies: Altering training content, providing materials in accessible formats, or revising uniform requirements can ensure that employees remain fully engaged and supported.
• Temporary Accommodations: Employers can initiate short-term measures while searching for a permanent or more comprehensive adjustment. This approach can keep employees productive and address urgent needs promptly.

Accommodations for Mental Health Conditions

Mental health conditions, such as anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, can qualify as disabilities if they substantially limit one or more major life activities. Reasonable accommodations in this area might include offering private workspaces (for instance, to reduce stress triggers), permitting flexible break schedules for therapy sessions, adjusting start and end times to mitigate anxiety during peak traffic hours, or granting periodic telework as medically supported. Employers should not overlook the interactive process for mental health conditions. They must consider any documentation that identifies care needs or functional limitations linked to a psychological or psychiatric condition.

Evaluating Reasonableness and Undue Hardship

In Pennsylvania and under federal law, the accommodation need only be effective, not necessarily the individual’s first choice. When the requested accommodation imposes a significant expense, disrupts business operations extensively, or causes safety risks, an employer may argue undue hardship. Even in such instances, the employer is expected to collaborate with the employee to explore alternative solutions that might be more feasible. Failure to consider alternatives or to engage in ongoing dialogue could expose the employer to liability under the ADA or PHRA.

Filing a Disability Discrimination Claim in Pennsylvania 

If you are an applicant or employee who believes you have faced disability discrimination, you have the option to file a charge with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), or both. The PHRC is responsible for enforcing the PHRA, while the EEOC addresses claims under the ADA. Generally, discrimination complaints under the PHRA must be filed within 180 days of the alleged violation. However, due to a work-sharing agreement between the PHRC and the EEOC, a charge submitted to one agency will typically be cross-filed with the other.

Under federal rules, individuals can normally file a complaint with the EEOC within 300 days of the discriminatory act, provided certain conditions are met. Even though the extended 300-day period may be available, it is advisable to initiate the process as soon as possible to preserve all legal options and evidence. In rare cases, equitable tolling might extend filing deadlines when crucial facts were concealed or the employee did not discover the discrimination immediately, but one should not rely on such exceptions where timely filing is still feasible.

Administrative Exhaustion and Next Steps

Before a civil lawsuit can be filed in most cases, the complainant must allow the PHRC or the EEOC to conduct an investigation and attempt resolution, often through mediation or conciliation efforts. If those efforts are unsuccessful, the agency may issue a notice of the right to sue, at which point a lawsuit can be filed in court.

Basic Burden of Proof in a Disability Discrimination Suit

In a civil case based on disability discrimination, the person making the claim generally has the initial responsibility to establish key elements: 

• That they are protected under the ADA and/or PHRA by virtue of a disability, perceived disability, or history of disability.
• That they are qualified to perform the essential functions of their job, with or without accommodation.
• That they experienced an adverse action (e.g., firing, demotion, denial of promotion) related to their disability.

If the individual can show these elements, the burden typically shifts to the employer to provide a nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse action or to show that no reasonable accommodation would allow the employee to perform essential job functions. These proof mechanisms serve as the framework for litigation, although specific procedural steps can vary depending on the forum and type of claim.

If you have questions about your rights or need help navigating the process, you may wish to consult with a lawyer in Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Remedies for Disability Discrimination 

When an employee in Pennsylvania demonstrates that disability discrimination has occurred, several remedies may be available to compensate losses and promote fair treatment in the workplace:

• Back Pay: If an individual was unlawfully terminated or denied a promotion, a court or agency may order payment of wages and benefits the employee would have received had the discriminatory action not taken place.
• Compensatory Damages: These damages can address emotional distress, inconvenience, and any out-of-pocket costs directly linked to the discrimination, which may include therapy expenses or job search costs. Federal law imposes caps on compensatory damages for ADA claims based on employer size, but the PHRA does not have the same statutory caps, although court practices guide the amounts awarded in successful claims.
• Punitive Damages: Under certain conditions, if an employer’s conduct demonstrates malice or reckless disregard for an employee’s rights, a court may award punitive damages. The ADA imposes upper limits on such damages, also determined by the employer’s size.
• Reinstatement or Promotion: Employers may be compelled to restore individuals to positions they would have held if not for the discrimination, or to provide rightful promotions that were denied.
• Injunctive Relief or Policy Reforms: Courts can mandate that employers revise policies, post notices about employee rights, provide training for staff, or implement other structural changes to prevent future discrimination.
• Attorney’s Fees and Costs: Successful claimants are often entitled to recoup reasonable expenses for legal representation, filing fees, and related litigation costs.

These remedies aim to restore the affected worker to the position they would have occupied but for unlawful discrimination, while encouraging employers to adopt policies and practices that uphold the rights of individuals with disabilities. By creating an environment free from bias, workplaces can retain talented employees, minimize legal conflicts, and cultivate a respectful culture.

Employers and employees should remain mindful that compliance with the ADA, PHRA, and related local ordinances is an ongoing responsibility. Engaging in a meaningful interactive process, responding thoughtfully to accommodation requests, and basing employment decisions on objective criteria rather than on assumptions about disabilities are essential aspects of fulfilling this responsibility. A workplace committed to fair treatment of individuals with disabilities fosters greater inclusion, reduces the likelihood of costly disputes, and helps everyone contribute to their fullest potential.

Assistance With Legal Issues in the Workplace

Assistance with legal issues in the workplace can feel overwhelming without knowledgeable representation. If you find yourself navigating a complex workplace concern or need guidance on your disability-related rights, call Polishan Solfanelli at 570-562-4520 for direction and support. Our experienced Scranton, Pennsylvania lawyers are dedicated to helping employees understand their options and safeguard their livelihoods. Whether you are dealing with an employer who resists accommodations, suspect discrimination based on a past or perceived impairment, or need clarity on local ordinances, seeking the counsel of informed attorneys can help you approach the situation strategically. We understand the nuances of employment law in Pennsylvania and utilize this understanding to clarify your rights. With a focus on open communication and personalized strategies, we strive to resolve challenges while preserving your professional future. Reach out today and discover how we can guide you toward a secure, fair workplace. You are not alone here either.