Delta interviewees held up by shrink
12-06-2022, 04:14 PM
#492
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,241
ADA Amendment Act of 2008, which was specifically crafted to overturn Supreme Court cases that had permitted airlines to disqualify people for a disability that was not disqualifying to the FAA. In one of the cases - Sutton vs United Airlines, two pilots were disqualified because of their uncorrected visual acuity even though they corrected to FAA standards. SCOTUS found for UAL reasoning the two pilots had no disability so the ADA did not apply. That discrimination did not sit well with Congress and eventually led to the ADA Amendment Act, changing the law to make it illegal to refuse to hire someone because you BELIEVE they have a disability, whether they do or not.
How does the ADAAA define "regarded as" having a disability?
The ADAAA redefines and dramatically expands the scope of coverage under the "regarded as" prong of the definition of "disability." To satisfy the "regarded as" standard an individual need only show that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under the statute (e.g., termination; failure to hire) because of an actual or perceived impairment. It is no longer necessary that the impairment be perceived by the employer to limit or "substantially limit" a major life activity. However, to satisfy the "regarded as" standard, an impairment must not be one that is "transitory and minor." The ADAAA defines a "transitory" impairment as an impairment with an "actual or expected duration of 6 months or less."Meeting the "regarded as" standard does not mean that a person has been the victim of unlawful discrimination. It means only that a person is an individual with a disability entitled to the protections of the ADA or Rehabilitation Act. Whether unlawful discrimination occurred is a separate determination.
And if they are picking on ex military attack pilots for being ex military attack pilots, that could get ugly fast too…
12-06-2022, 04:41 PM
#493
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,729
So you are saying this is actually a MEDICAL assessment, not a “fit in with the rest of the team” assessment? Because that would be illegal under the
ADA Amendment Act of 2008, which was specifically crafted to overturn Supreme Court cases that had permitted airlines to disqualify people for a disability that was not disqualifying to the FAA. In one of the cases - Sutton vs United Airlines, two pilots were disqualified because of their uncorrected visual acuity even though they corrected to FAA standards. SCOTUS found for UAL reasoning the two pilots had no disability so the ADA did not apply. That discrimination did not sit well with Congress and eventually led to the ADA Amendment Act, changing the law to make it illegal to refuse to hire someone because you BELIEVE they have a disability, whether they do or not.
If indeed this is found to be a medical assessment, it could open up the airline to a class action suit by everyone disqualified by the PARB.
And if they are picking on ex military attack pilots for being ex military attack pilots, that could get ugly fast too…
ADA Amendment Act of 2008, which was specifically crafted to overturn Supreme Court cases that had permitted airlines to disqualify people for a disability that was not disqualifying to the FAA. In one of the cases - Sutton vs United Airlines, two pilots were disqualified because of their uncorrected visual acuity even though they corrected to FAA standards. SCOTUS found for UAL reasoning the two pilots had no disability so the ADA did not apply. That discrimination did not sit well with Congress and eventually led to the ADA Amendment Act, changing the law to make it illegal to refuse to hire someone because you BELIEVE they have a disability, whether they do or not.
If indeed this is found to be a medical assessment, it could open up the airline to a class action suit by everyone disqualified by the PARB.
And if they are picking on ex military attack pilots for being ex military attack pilots, that could get ugly fast too…
12-06-2022, 08:34 PM
#494
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Big ones
Posts: 792
vette, hang in there this season will pass soon.
Last edited by tripled; 12-06-2022 at 08:57 PM.
12-07-2022, 04:06 AM
#496
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2021
Posts: 158
Thanks everyone, Judy venting a bit I guess. Strange thing is that I have done these before for a job in the Air Force and didn't have any issues. Guess they were looking for a different kind of crazy!
I'm assuming the email isn't something you can respond to, just to thank him for notifying me(trying to just be polite). It's from [email protected]
I'm assuming the email isn't something you can respond to, just to thank him for notifying me(trying to just be polite). It's from [email protected]
12-07-2022, 04:25 AM
#497
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 133
Thanks everyone, Judy venting a bit I guess. Strange thing is that I have done these before for a job in the Air Force and didn't have any issues. Guess they were looking for a different kind of crazy!
I'm assuming the email isn't something you can respond to, just to thank him for notifying me(trying to just be polite). It's from [email protected]
I'm assuming the email isn't something you can respond to, just to thank him for notifying me(trying to just be polite). It's from [email protected]
12-07-2022, 04:57 AM
#498
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2022
Posts: 42
I went through this in August. It sure is a gut punch after the exhilaration of receiving the CJO. As hard as it is, try and put it in the back of your mind and don’t dwell on it. I was given the green light after two weeks. Best of luck, the odds are greatly in your favor.
12-07-2022, 05:18 AM
#499
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2021
Posts: 158
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
