Most human resources professionals and employment lawyers
recognize that an employee or applicant that is overweight to the point of
being obese, may well be considered “disabled” under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). If disabled, it
follows that such individuals are entitled to reasonable accommodations as may
be needed to perform the essential functions of the job. But according to a very recent decision from
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit (which covers
Minnesota, Iowa and the Dakotas, among other states) the fact that an
individual is obese, even morbidly obese, does not necessarily mean that he or
she is “disabled” within the meaning of the ADA. In Morriss
v. BNSF Railway Co. (April 5, 2016), the court held that in order to qualify
as a “disability,” obesity must result from an underlying physiological
disorder or condition. As the court
put it, being overweight – “no matter
how far outside [the normal] range” – does not, standing alone, meet the
definition of a physical “impairment.” Addressing the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission’s (EEOC) position in its “friend of the court” brief, the court rejected the conclusion that morbid
obesity constituted a disability regardless of the cause. Instead, according to this new decision
obesity of any level, whether termed “severe,” “morbid,” or “class III”
obesity, is not a disability absent some underlying physiological disorder or
condition. Qualifying examples of
physiological disorders or conditions, would include hypothyroidism, Cushing’s
syndrome, etc.
This recent decision is consistent with decisions from the
Courts of Appeals for the 2nd and 6th Circuits. However, these two earlier decisions came
prior to the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, which significantly expanded the
definition of who qualifies as “disabled” under the law, whereas the 8th
Circuit’s decision in Morriss, was
issued just this month, on April 5, 2016.
However, despite this broadened definition of disability, and the EEOC’s
change of position on the issue as a result of the amendments, the court held
that the requirement that obesity be caused by a physiological condition in
order to be a disability, remained unchanged.
Although the individual in this case was not disabled, if obesity
is the result of a physiological disorder, it could be a disability, and it
could also cause other disabilities, such as diabetes, sleep apnea, hypertension,
or heart disease. As a result of this
decision, employers who assume that obese applicants or employees are
automatically disabled, may unwittingly: (a) pursue accommodations where none
may be required; or (b) risk liability under the ADA’s “regarded as” disabled
prong, if they assume that the individual has an “impairment,” and adverse
action is taken. Because of this, employers faced with an
accommodation request from an obese individual should look further at medical
documentation, not only to verify the need for an accommodation, but also for
the underlying cause of the obesity. For assistance in dealing with questions
regarding disabilities, contact James Sherman, at (952) 746-1700 or email
jasherman@wesselssherman.com.
