Replies: 2 comments
WebWord Interview: The Facts About Repetitive Strain Injuries
Posted by John S. Rhodes @ 01/08/2002 07:33 PM EST
"Disability cannot be assessed by looking only at someone's fitness to work, the court said."
Huh, everything I know about America indicates your value to society is dictated by your job. If you are jobless, you are a burden for everyone else. If you make minimum wage, well, at least you're not on welfare.
If the presidential election didn't destroy my faith in the judicial system, then this ruling stamped out what was left of it.
People with CTS are just as disabled as visually impaired or wheelchair-bound people. If you ask the later two groups, they will say they are able and lead productive lives, but their disabilities prevent them from doing certain types of activities. That is the case with CTS as well.
Now, if this woman had CTS before she was hired, then she should not be given *special* accommodation. After all, you hire people capable of doing the defined job. (You wouldn't ask a blind person to photograph swimsuit models.) But *reasonable* accommodation should be made. For example, bi-level desks are common for people with repetitive stress injuries because they allow for precise control of keyboard and monitor height (which is good for everyone, including temporarily-abled people).
Now, if this woman was injured on-the-job, then Toyota should give her another position where she can be functional. (Is it really that tough to find her a different job?) Please don't recite the lawyeresque excuse of "If we make an exception for her, we have to do it for everyone." Umm, that's BS. Nothing should stop you from doing the right thing. The article says they gave her a new job, but then added duties that hurt her condition. I buy that. Toyota sucks.
Posted by Jack Schonchin @ 01/08/2002 11:59 PM EST