President Bush recently signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, which overturns several Supreme Court rulings that provided employers with multiple defenses to ADA claims. The new law is expected to alter how employers handle disability issues.

The law continues to protect employees who are "substantially limited" in "major life activities." New interpretations and definitions of these terms should expand the scope of coverage under the ADA. In addition, the amendments have set relaxed parameters for coverage of episodic impairments, such as epilepsy or post-traumatic stress disorder. Also, the use of medication or prosthetics to manage a life condition now cannot be analyzed in interpreting an employee's alleged disability. These changes and other modifications will allow many more employees to seek coverage under the law.

The new standards will require employers to consider the need to make reasonable accommodations in many more instances than are necessary under current law. The new law will not only make it more challenging for employers to manage day-to-day workplace situations, but it also will likely lead to increased litigation.

Employers should become familiar with the new provisions, which go into effect on Jan. 1, 2009, and take the following steps: Review company handbooks and policies concerning the ADA to incorporate the provisions of the ADAAA; train all human resources and employee health personnel and managers who may be involved in assessing employee disabilities and providing reasonable accommodations to employees; and carefully consider any adverse employment actions affecting individuals who may meet the relaxed coverage standards.

-- Christopher Ramsey,
Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP
cramsey@morganlewis.com,

In reducing a jury verdict by $4.7 million in a disabilities discrimination case against Wal-Mart, a federal appeals judge recently said the $300,000 federal cap on punitive damages in the Americans with Disabilities Act has little impact on changing the behavior of very large companies.

In the case, a man suffering from cerebral palsy sued Wal-Mart. The jury found that the Wal-Mart store in question violated federal and state laws by failing to reasonably accommodate him and making a prohibited inquiry before giving him an employment offer. The jury also found that Wal-Mart subjected the employee to a hostile work environment by transferring him from a pharmacy job to a more physically taxing position pushing carts in the parking lot.

The jury awarded the employee $7.5 million in damages, including $5 million in punitive damages. But the judge reduced the verdict to $2.8 million, primarily by decreasing the punitive damage award to the ADA limit of $300,000. "The preceding ruling respects the law," wrote the judge, "but it does not achieve a just result."

The judge said that a $300,000 punitive cap was unlikely "to restrain Wal-Mart from inflicting similar abuses."

Under federal anti-discrimination law, punitive damages are calculated according to the size of the employer.

Violators with 15 to 100 employees pay no more than $50,000, while those with 500 or more employees such as Wal-Mart pay up to $300,000.

The open question is whether or not this verdict will instigate a movement to raise the maximum limits on punitive damages under the ADA and other federal anti-discrimination laws.

-- Laura Candris,
Meyer Unkovic & Scott,
lac@muslaw.com