This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ware, now you may
have an obligation at the risk of being sued to accommodate someone who does not
possess the ability to "get along with others." Not only is this "disability" vague, but it's
bizarre, ominous, and wholly outside of the group of serious disabilities Congress
intended to cover with this statute. Does this opinion suggest that a person's foul
temperament may no longer be a reason to deny that person a job? 208 Second, the doctors evaluating McAlindin do not paint a picture of a man with a
cognizable [**36] disability. Dr. Sandweiss, a treating physician, calls his impairment
"slight to moderate," and this opinion was rendered before he began his medication. Dr.
Rabiner says McAlindin is able to work. Dr. Reiss says that McAlindin is not disabled
and requires no accommodation to return to work; and not one of the doctors claims that
his condition is substantially limiting.
Third, I fail to see any causal connection whatsoever with McAlindin's alleged sexual
disfunction and the job he wants, the job he has, or the adverse employment actions he
alleges he suffered. Is the employer supposed to accommodate his impotence?
Fourth, McAlindin's proffered evidence fails utterly to show that he suffered an "adverse
employment action." The defendants never denied him a transfer; they exercised their
right to try keeping him in the same position first, remaining open to the idea that a
transfer might be in order. Moreover, there do not appear to have been any consequences
following the reprimand for sleeping when he was supposed to be working, a
chastisement for which the employer can hardly be blamed. His request for
accommodation seems to be a request that he be allowed to sleep when [**37] he is
supposed to be working. Furthermore, the record reflects that McAlindin [*1241] got
the same training everyone else did; and the record is significantly devoid of information
that he needed special training due to his disability. I would affirm on the ground that
View Full Document
- Spring '08