Quantcast

Judge rules that alcoholism isn't covered under ADA as he dismisses employment discrimination case

LOUISIANA RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Judge rules that alcoholism isn't covered under ADA as he dismisses employment discrimination case

Federal Court
Judge 800x450

A recovering alcoholic lost his employment discrimination suit against his former employer that terminated him shortly after his return from a relapse recovery.

On Feb. 28, U.S. District Judge Barry W. Ashe granted summary judgment for defendants Centralized Management Services, LLC and Episode Solutions, LLC. Justin Moore, who worked as an orthopedic implant coordinator for roughly three months, accused the defendants of firing him because of his disability and struggle with alcohol. But the defendants were able to prove it was his performance that caused him to lose his job.

Judge Ashe pointed out that the Americans with Disabilities Act does not consider alcoholism as a protected disability. While Moore provided arguments that he couldn’t work properly during his days of relapse, he also said he was a binge drinker and has never had a drink every day. Considering this, his relapse, that happened between Sept. 22 and Sept. 25 of 2017, “does not satisfy the permanency requirement to constitute a substantially limiting impairment under the ADA,” wrote Judge Ashe. Instead, his struggle with alcohol is considered an “occasional manifestation,” according to the opinion.

Meanwhile, the defendants listed several moments that contributed to Moore’s poor performance and ultimately led to his termination. According to defendants, Moore didn’t complete his consistent job requirements like scheduling meetings and issuing reports, not going to conference calls, being unprofessional, and not answering calls from clients.

“It is of no moment that Moore’s transgressions were caused by an alcoholic and relapse because a non-alcoholic employee would have been terminated for the same behavior,” wrote Judge Ashe. He pointed out that keeping an employee on board who doesn’t fulfill his expected tasks isn’t something that employers can be expected to do.

“Thus, defendants were within their rights to terminate Moore for his poor job performance,” Judge Ashe wrote.

More News