INCLUSION DAILY EXPRESS -- Toyota v. Williams: What is a disability?

Inclusion Daily Express Logo

International Disability Rights News Service
Click here for today's headlines

Keeping advocates informed, inspired and connected since 1999.
Click here for daily or weekly delivery . . . OR
Try Inclusion Daily Express for two weeks FREE . . .

Toyota v. Williams: What is a disability?

2002
January 8: High Court Rules ADA Does Not Cover Williams
2001
April 19: High Court To Rule On What A Disability Is
August 8: Justice Department Position Concerns Disability Rights Advocates
November 7: High Court To Decide What Is And Is Not A Disability

Text of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision

High Court To Rule On What A Disability Is
By Dave Reynolds, Inclusion Daily Exprss
April 19, 2001

WASHINGTON, DC--The U.S. Supreme Court decided on Monday to hear arguments in two separate cases having to do with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The cases would be heard this fall, and decisions would likely come in 2002.

The first case is that of Ella Williams, a former paint inspector at a Toyota plant in Kentucky. Williams claims she developed carpal tunnel syndrome which is a painful wrist condition caused by doing certain tasks over and over again.

Toyota says it offered Williams a different job, but Williams turned it down saying it still included some manual labor that she was not able to do.

The high court will be asked to decide whether her carpal tunnel syndrome is an isolated injury, as Toyota claims, or if it is an impairment of a "major life activity" as defined by the ADA.

The second case involves Robert Barnett, a former US Airways baggage handler from San Francisco who injured his back while on the job. At his doctor's suggestion, Barnett was reassigned to the mail room. The company later told Barnett that, according to company policy, he would have to give up the job to make room for another employee who had more seniority.

Barnett sued claiming the company had not given him a reasonable accommodation. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Barnett that workers with disabilities should have priority over more senior workers who do not have disabilities.

Click here for top of this page

Justice Department Position Concerns Disability Rights Advocates
By Dave Reynolds, Inclusion Daily Express
August 8, 2001

WASHINGTON, DC--Some disability rights groups are rallying together in response to a Justice Department's recent move to support a company being sued for discrimination in an upcoming Supreme Court case.

The case involves Ella Williams, a former paint inspector at a Toyota plant in Kentucky. Williams claims she developed carpal tunnel syndrome which is a painful wrist condition caused by doing certain tasks over and over again. She alleges that the company fired her in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Toyota said it offered Williams a different job, but she turned it down because it still included some manual labor that she was not able to do.

The high court has agreed to hear the case this fall to decide whether her carpal tunnel syndrome is an isolated injury, as Toyota claims, or if it is an impairment of a "major life activity" as defined by the ADA.

Some disability groups say the Justice Department's decision to file a legal brief on behalf of Toyota casts serious doubt on the Bush Administration's resolve in supporting Americans with disabilities.

More information on how the groups are responding, including the American Association of People With Disabilities (AAPD) and the National Council on Independent Living, are available in this Washington Post article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44656-2001Aug7.html

Click here for top of this page

High Court To Decide What Is And Is Not A Disability
By Dave Reynolds, Inclusion Daily Express
November 7, 2001

WASHINGTON, DC--The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could help further define what is and is not protected as a disability under the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act.

The case is that of Ella Williams, a former paint inspector at a Toyota plant in Kentucky. Williams claims she developed carpal tunnel syndrome which is a painful wrist condition caused by doing certain tasks over and over again. She alleges that the company fired her in violation of the ADA.

Toyota says it offered Williams a different job, but Williams turned it down saying it still included some manual labor that she was not able to do.

The high court will be asked to decide whether her carpal tunnel syndrome is an isolated injury, as Toyota claims, or if it is an impairment of a "major life activity" as defined by the ADA.

This summer, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a legal brief showing support for Toyota, casting serious doubt in the minds of many disability groups as to the current Bush Administration's resolve in supporting American workers who have disabilities.

This Associated Press article about the case appeared in the automobile industry news section of Auto.com:
http://www.auto.com/industry/toyot7_20011107.htm

Click here for top of this page

High Court Rules ADA Does Not Cover Williams
By Dave Reynolds, Inclusion Daily Express
January 8, 2002

WASHINGTON, DC--In a decision that could effect millions of people who have one or more disabling conditions, the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday ruled that Ella Williams was not protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act when she sued Toyota Motor Corp. for firing her.

Williams, a former paint inspector at a Toyota plant in Kentucky, developed carpal tunnel syndrome, a painful wrist condition caused by doing certain tasks over and over again. She claimed that the company would not provide her with a reasonable accommodation but fired her in violation of the ADA.

Toyota argued that it offered Williams a different job, but that Williams turned it down saying it still included some manual labor that she was not able to do.

In its unanimous ruling, the high court wrote that Williams' carpal tunnel syndrome was an isolated injury and that while it may have kept her from doing the manual tasks in her job, it did not substantially keep her from doing "important" life activities outside her job such as bathing, brushing her teeth and cleaning her house.

''To be substantially limited in performing manual tasks (and covered by the ADA), an individual must have an impairment that prevents . . . activities that are of central importance to most people's daily lives,'' wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

"If Congress intended everyone with a physical impairment that precluded the performance of some isolated, unimportant or particularly difficult manual task to qualify as disabled, the number of disabled Americans would surely have been much higher'' than the 43 million Americans identified by the drafters of the 1990 ADA, O'Connor wrote.

Tuesday's decision reversed a lower court opinion that had favored Williams. The high court said that the lower court made a mistake when it focused on her ability to use her hands and arms to do a type of manual labor, instead of other life activities.

The reaction to the ruling has been mixed. Some members of the business community are praising the ruling, saying that it will reduce the number of "frivolous" suits filed against employers based on disabilities. Others are saying it does not matter to them because they already work to accommodate employees when requested.

Likewise, the disability rights community has been divided in its response. Emails from some ADA experts are saying the decision is another attempt by the Supreme Court to weaken the power of the law, and exclude people who have legitimate claims. Others argue that it will actually strengthen the ADA, by making sure that it is reserved for people whose disabilities are significant.

"It is raising the bar, but it is not closing the door,'' Arlene Mayerson of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Inc. (DREDF) told Reuters. "It could send a signal that the act does not cover people with these kinds of injuries."

Some of these varied opinions can be found on this item from the Ragged Edge:
"An Absurd Way To Apply A Civil Rights Law"
http://www.raggededgemagazine.com/extra/williamsruling010902.htm

Here is the text of the ruling:
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/00-1089.html

Click here for top of this page

You can have the latest disability rights news delivered to your email Inbox every week day.
Subscribe to Inclusion Daily Express today!

Get your news here!