The company updated its attendance policy to make punctuality a priority. But did it unwittingly break the ADA by holding a disabled employee to the new, stricter standards? Read the case and decide: Who won?

The facts:

A company instituted a new no fault attendance policy, which included a rule requiring every employee to come in to work exactly on time. The problem arose when a wheelchair-bound employee was often delayed in getting to his workstation. As a compromise, he offered to stay late to make up any time he missed in the morning. No dice, the company said the new rules were for everyone. After coming in late several times, the guy was fired. He sued under the ADA.

The employer said:

Punctuality is an essential part of everyones job. After dealing with attendance problems in the past, it wanted to make sure all employees knew the new rules applied to everyone no excuses allowed.

Who won? The employee.

Why: The judge looked at the man’s job duties said he didn’t see any reason he couldn’t have come in to work a little late and then stayed a little longer to make up the time. The ADA doesn’t protect employees who can’t meet the job’s essential requirements but just because the company said punctuality was essential didn’t make it so.

If the man was working, for example, a scheduled shift in a call center, or if his co-workers depended on him to be there at the same time they were, the company may have been in the clear. But the judge didn’t see any sound business reason for turning down his compromise.

Courts tend to come down hard on companies that seem to have arbitrary policies about accommodations for disabled employees. Certainly, you can have policies, but the reasons behind them must be solid and not appear to have the tone of “just because I said so.”

Cite: Holly v. Clairson Industries, LLC