Comments on: ADA accommodation vs. ADA accommodation

By: Bob Lipton

Bob Lipton — Fri, 14 May 2010 03:29:27 +0000

I am aware that pneumonia is caused by microbes. I am also aware that heating and chilling inside is not the most healthful of environments.

Bob

By: Tsiroth

Tsiroth — Fri, 14 May 2010 03:17:46 +0000

Bob: You do understand that pneumonia is caused by bacteria or viruses, and not by cold air?

By: Jack Wilson

Jack Wilson — Thu, 13 May 2010 20:53:44 +0000

Correction: I realize the ADA isn’t an agency, but a ‘law’. A very vague law.

By: Jack Wilson

Jack Wilson — Thu, 13 May 2010 20:52:23 +0000

How have the ADA and the EEOC survived constitutional scrutiny? Neither of these agencies should even exist, according to my copy of the constitution. What gives the federal government the authority to get involved in private employment issues?

By: captnhal

captnhal — Thu, 13 May 2010 10:51:34 +0000

The NY Times article only gives the paprika side. I’d like to hear the dog side before choosing sides. I’d also like to know if the employee with the dog allergy ever had to work in a place with a seeing eye dog and what was done to accommodate. Is this office really too small to fit both employees?

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Wed, 12 May 2010 16:19:31 +0000

Get rid of both of them. Then you can say that you treated both equally.

By: roy

roy — Wed, 12 May 2010 08:03:22 +0000

Who’s responsible for making sure both can attend the trial?

By: kimsch

kimsch — Tue, 11 May 2010 23:34:07 +0000

Paprika is made from peppers. Is she only allergic to the powdered paprika? You’d think she’d be allergic to chipotle, cayenne, jalapeno, etc. as well.

By: D

Tue, 11 May 2010 23:08:36 +0000

The way I read kat’s suggestion is to put the two employees into a room packed full of dogs and paprika and see which employee melts first. Or they could choose to work it out amicably. I know that’s not what you said, but I posit that it would be effective on many levels.

By: Dirk D

Dirk D — Tue, 11 May 2010 22:43:09 +0000

“Indiana state law requires an employer to allow an employee to bring a service dog to work. There are financial and prison penalties attached. The employer [in this caase the State itself] must also make other accomodations for the dog allergy sufferer.”

Only if the state has waived sovereign immunity to that suit. Maybe that’s why she filed with the EEOC under the ADA. Anyways, for now she is only pursuing the federal claim.