Workers Right

Workers Right

The Americans that live with disabilities are protected by the Act known as the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Act is one of the significant influential laws in American history. The Act was meant to cover those that are living with disability against any form of discrimination from work. However, the question lies to what extent does the cover goes. With accordance to the Act, an employer can turn down persons with disability if their condition imposes an undue hardship on the operation of the employee’s business. In the case of John, according to the performance evolution done by the company, it indicated that he was the least performing staff. Which means the cost that the company was spending on him as compared to the output he was giving the company was negative, and hence he was more a liability to the company than an asset.

Apart from protection from discrimination at work, the ADA is currently protecting over 43 million American. It allows the disabled to access education and housing, which were things that were hard to acquire before. The language that the Act was drafted in back in 1990 has limited some scope on the definition of impairment. For instance, John case is an issue where he was a senior analyst who was in a good health condition by the time of employment. However, he developed health complication during his time in the work.John’s condition was limited due to the perception of the general public towards impairement and disability. The Act termed a disability more as a physical condition as opposed to the medical condition.

The understanding of the various categories within the Act will give us a clear understanding of the distinct clause that the company might have bridged. The multiple sections of the acts are divided into titles. The Act contains five titles, the first one deal with an equal employment opportunity for all citizens. As I previously mentioned, this means that regardless of any physical condition, people with disability should be granted the same chance as everyone else. The second title deals with the ease for the disabled to get access to the services. The services include those that are provided with both by the state and the local government. The third title deals with access to various businesses that are being both operated publicly and in private. The fourth title of the Act empowers communication among the disabled. This meant that telephone and other voice communication services were to be made more suitable even to those that have a hearing problem. The last title of the Act deals with the miscellaneous provisions. This title deals with the ADA as a whole, and how it is related to other laws, such as the impact on the insurance provider, the use of illegal drugs. This section also highlights cases that are not considered to be a disability.

John sued the company claming that the termination of his contract was due to his disablity. He claims that he was laid off due to his condition; however, when we look deep into it, after his treatment, the company allowed him back on a part-time basis. It was at the best interest of the company to find a sustainable way for John despite his condition. However, six-month letter instead of showing improvement, his performance even got worst. According to the ADA, it is clearly stated that any person with disability has the right to be employed in a company both public and private institution. This is possible as long as their condition does not lag the company behind or rather, the working condition of the company does not make the person with disability strain while working. When we look at John’s situation, he breaks both the ADA acts since, due to his performance among other top managerial position make the company incur a considerable labour cost. The loss that Acme undergoes while paying for senior positions is too high compared to the output. This pushes Acme to find the loophole for their problem. By conducting, performance ratings, it was a move that was meant for the entire top managerial but not for a particular, individuals with any condition of any kind.

According to the title five of the ADA, the miscellaneous provision indicates the relation of ADA with other laws. When the supervisor saw the drugs that John used in his drawer, he was supposed to inquire about them. Since the drugs were not prescribed for John, it is clear that they were obtained illegally. This may have worsened his condition and getting drugs with illegitimate means is not allowed by the Act. Regardless of his health condition, John would have sought help from professional hands rather than the random taking of the drugs. Having a health complication does not give one any privilege to break any law. It does not provide any loophole for special treatment that is not prescribed since this can be even more fatal.

In conclusion, the American with Disability Act was meant to provide a free space that would accommodate people with disability. It was an inclusivity law that gave those with a disability also to be productive in society and as well gets a means to sustain themselves and their families. The action that the company took towards Jhon, may be considered to be unfair in one point of view. However, considering the timeframe from the day John had the heart attack to the day of contract termination, it is clear that the company was willing to accommodate him and give him a chance to heal in the process. The company did not discriminate him but instead became more lenient to him in that they gave him the job during the recovery process but on a part-time basis. In some companies, such a critical position cannot be handled in a part-time scheduled, and he could have been laid off the moment they knew he was sick. In my view, John was the one taking advantage of the Act and sued Acme to his advantage.