|
A Fourth Circuit court recently issued a decision granting summary
judgment to an employer where an employee stated she was capable of
performing the functions and skills of her position despite her bipolar
disorder and migraines, but expressed concerns over an increased
workload. In Johnson v. NC Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2006
U.S. Dist. Lexis 71498 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 29, 2006) the Middle District of
North Carolina made clear that a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or
she is unable to work a broad range of jobs, not just a particular job,
to be considered disabled under the ADA.
Case History and Findings
Plaintiff Lisa Johnson sued her former employer, the North Carolina
Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”) and others alleging she
was harassed and constructively discharged based on her disability in
violation of, among other things, the Americans with Disabilities Act
(“ADA”).
The plaintiff was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1999, while working
as a social worker with the Forsyth County Department of Social
Services. In 2003 and 2004, her workload increased, causing her to
suffer from chronic migraine headaches and emotional problems. The
plaintiff believed the increased stress and anxiety would make it
difficult to keep her bipolar disorder under control. After an
emergency room visit, she took two weeks of FMLA leave.
Upon returning to work, the plaintiff informed her supervisors she was
capable of performing the functions and skills required in her position,
but expressed concern over her increasing caseload. She was released by
her physician “to work on a full time basis with no restrictions.” She
later took additional FMLA leave and was again released by her physician
to return to work “with no restrictions.”
The plaintiff resigned in January of 2005 to escape what she perceived
to be harassment and discrimination. She later took a full time job as
a social worker in another county.
The defendants moved for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s ADA claim.
The court examined whether Ms. Johnson had a “disability” within the
meaning of the statute, specifically examining whether she was
substantially limited in the major life activity of working. The court
stated: “To be substantially limited in the major life activity of
working, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she is unable to work
in a broad range of jobs. It is not enough to demonstrate only an
inability to perform ‘one type of job, a specialized job, or a
particular job of choice.’” Additionally, the court noted that in the
Fourth Circuit, obtaining a new job is evidence an impairment is not
substantially limiting.
For these reasons, the court held the plaintiff failed to prove she was
substantially limited in the major life activity of working. As support
for this holding, the court noted: (1) Ms. Johnson made it clear she was
capable of performing the functions and skills of her position; (2) her
physician released her to work with no restrictions; (3) Ms. Johnson
stated her conditions are “under control with medication”; and (4) Ms.
Johnson found another position where she is able to successfully manage
her caseload without any type of accommodation. Moreover, the court
found generalized allegations that the plaintiff’s bipolar disorder made
her: “(1) feel agitated, emotional, unmotivated, and isolated; and (2)
unable to concentrate, sleep (or to sleep excessively), work, eat, and
consistently care for herself” were insufficient to withstand the
defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Therefore, the court held the
plaintiff was not “disabled” within the meaning of the ADA and granted
the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Employers Should Maintain Records of Employees’ Statements With Respect
to Potential Disabilities
This case illustrates that along with maintaining proper FMLA and
disability records, employers should consider implementing a retention
policy, under which employees’ statements with respect to their
potential disability are retained. As in the Johnson case, where the
employee made it clear she was capable of performing the functions and
skills of her position, it is possible such statements may later help an
employer defend against an ADA or related claim.
If you have any questions or
need assistance implementing these suggestions, please contact
Susie Gibbons at 919.783.2813 or
sgibbons@poynerspruill.com.
|
