The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis overturned a ruling by a federal judge in Arkansas, saying that reassigning a worker to a lower-paying job after injury wasn't discriminatory by Wal-Mart (WMT).
What the case dealt with was an employee being injured at a Wal-Mart store and she couldn't perform her duties any longer. As a result Wal-Mart put her into another position she could perform at, but it didn't pay as much as the former position. The employee sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act, asserting that she should have been awarded a different, higher-paying job at the former pay rate.
Wal-Mart's argument was their policy is to hire the most qualified applicant for a job, and wasn't legally mandated to give her the position she wanted.
The court agreed with Wal-Mart, saying that the Americans with Disabilities Act doesn't guarantee someone get a job, but rather that they're allowed to compete for the job.
"Wal-Mart reasonably accommodated Huber's disability by placing Huber in a maintenance associate position," the court's opinion said. "The maintenance position may not have been a perfect substitute job, or the employee's most-preferred alternative job, but an employer is not required to provide a disabled employee with an accommodation that is ideal from the employee's perspective, only an accommodation that is reasonable."
The attorney for the employee has said he'll definitely appeal the decision.
Sponsored link: The outsourcing every manager requires - Tampa Locksmith
Comment Preview