Safety Boot Requirement Stomps Worker’s Reasonable Accommodation Argument

Case File

A worker couldn't get boots to work for her feet that satisfied safety rules, so she couldn't perform the essential functions of her job. Simply Research subscribers have access to the full text of the decision.

Case

Radenbaugh v. U.S. Steel Clairton Works, 2024 WL 4436535 (W.D. Pa. 10/07/24)

What Happened

A chemical analyst for a manufacturing plant was required to wear metatarsal boots while onsite at the plant, and the plant provided employees with footwear that was ANSI-certified.

The analyst struggled to find boots that fit her properly because she had a square shaped fifth metatarsal, and after several attempts to find functional boots were unsuccessful, the analyst resigned as part of a workers' compensation settlement.

The analyst sued under the ADA, alleging that it failed to accommodate her disability when it required to wear ANSI-certified boots.

Rule of Law

Under the ADA, an employee must be "qualified," meaning that she can perform the essential functions of her job with or without reasonable accommodation. Factors for determining whether a function is essential include:

(1) The employer's judgment.

(2) Written job descriptions prepared before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job.

(3) The amount of time spent on the job performing the function.

(4) The consequences of not requiring the incumbent to perform the function.

(5) The terms of a collective bargaining agreement.

(6) The work experience of past incumbents in the job.

(7) The current work experience of incumbents in similar jobs.

What the District Court Said

The boot requirement was an essential function of the analyst's job, and the analyst's requested accommodation of "custom-made ANSI-certified footwear" could not be found.

Thus, the analyst "failed to make her facial showing that her requested accommodation of custom-made footwear was possible." Because the accommodation wasn't possible, the court concluded that the analyst could perform the essential functions of her job.

The court entered summary judgment in favor of the plant.

Takeaway

Being unable to comply with a dress requirement that is job-related and consistent with business necessity, such as a safety rule mandating the wearing of ANSI-certified metatarsal boots, renders a person not qualified under the ADA.

Share This Article: