Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex - based wage discrimination; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older; Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments; Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against
qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government; Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), which prohibits employment discrimination based on genetic information about an applicant, employee, or former employee; and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against
qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government;
Title I of the ADA requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodation to
qualified individuals with disabilities who are employees or applicants for employment, except when such accommodation would cause an undue hardship.
(5)(A) not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise
qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business of such covered entity; or
To discriminate «on the basis of disability» includes «not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise
qualified individual with a disability who is an... employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business of such covered entity.»
The Seventh Circuit noted that the ADA defines «discrimination» to include an employer's «not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise
qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer's business.»
Not exact matches
Special education programs in El Monte City School District are provided for children preschool through 8th grade
who qualify according to laws and regulations as outlined in the California Education Code and the Federal
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
The
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) calls for a team of individuals, including parents and school personnel, to work together to develop an Individual Educational Program (IEP) for a child who qualifies for special educatio
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) calls for a team of
individuals, including parents and school personnel, to work together to develop an Individual Educational Program (IEP) for a child who qualifies for special educatio
individuals, including parents and school personnel, to work together to develop an
Individual Educational Program (IEP) for a child
who qualifies for special education services.
A key principle of the ADA is that
individuals with disabilities who want to work and are
qualified to work must have an equal opportunity to work.
-- The term «
qualified individual with a
disability» means an
individual with a
disability who,
with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity.
(B) denying employment opportunities to a job applicant or employee
who is an otherwise
qualified individual with a
disability, if such denial is < based on the need of such covered entity to make reasonable accommodation to the physical or mental impairments of the employee or applicant;
-- Nothing in subsection (a) shall be construed to exclude as a
qualified individual with a
disability an
individual who --
Title I of the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the «ADA») requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals with disabilities («qualified employees») who are employees or applicants for employment, unless to do so would cause und
Disabilities Act of 1990 (the «ADA») requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodations to
qualified individuals with disabilities («qualified employees») who are employees or applicants for employment, unless to do so would cause und
disabilities («
qualified employees»)
who are employees or applicants for employment, unless to do so would cause undue hardship.
The ADA protects «
qualified individuals with disabilities,» which means anyone
with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, or
who has a record of such an impairment, or is generally regarded as having such an impairment.
The ADA defines «
qualified individual with a
disability» as» an
individual with a
disability who,
with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the functions of the position that they hold or desire.
The ADA defines a «
qualified individual with a
disability» as a disabled
individual who,
with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the position.
A «
qualified individual with a
disability» is «an
individual with a
disability who,
with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the position.»
In Kennedy v. Applause, Inc., the district court held that the plaintiff,
who suffered from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, was not a
qualified individual with a
disability, as she was totally disabled and could not have performed the essential functions of her job even
with reasonable accommodation.