Search the Community

Celiac.com 11/05/2024 - A new lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where a former employee is accusing her previous employer of discrimination and wrongful termination. Lauren Boyd, the plaintiff, claims that her former employer, Cigna Healthcare, violated both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Boyd's complaint outlines a series of events she believes led to her unjust dismissal from the company, centering around her chronic health conditions and her request for reasonable accommodations. The Timeline of Employment and Health Struggles According to court documents, Lauren Boyd began her employment at Cigna Healthcare on August 16, 2021, working as a customer service advocate. During her time with the company, Boyd suffered from chronic health issues, including celiac disease, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and anemia. These conditions, she alleges, were well-documented and known by her employer. Complicating her medical situation, Boyd also sustained injuries from an incident at Walmart on July 29, 2022, further exacerbating her health challenges. These injuries, coupled with her chronic illnesses, led her to require more time off work for treatment and recovery. She regularly used approved unpaid leave and ADA accommodation days when she experienced health flare-ups, particularly after incidents of gluten contamination, which worsened her condition. August 2023: A Turning Point in Health and Employment The most significant period of contention in Boyd's lawsuit took place in August and September of 2023. In August, she experienced a gluten contamination episode that triggered severe symptoms, leaving her immune system compromised. As a result, she developed an upper respiratory infection and later contracted COVID-19. Despite her deteriorating health, Boyd continued to manage her condition with approved unpaid leave and ADA days between August 11 and September 6, 2023. In her complaint, Boyd states that her health issues were compounded by Cigna's refusal to approve a medical treatment she required due to low iron levels caused by her chronic conditions. Boyd was prescribed a single-infusion iron drug, but Cigna denied her request for this specific treatment, offering a five-infusion alternative instead. This suggestion, Boyd argues, was unreasonable, given her challenging work schedule of four-day, ten-hour shifts. She found it nearly impossible to arrange the frequent medical appointments required for the alternative treatment without taking even more time off from work. The Application for Short-Term Disability and Termination As Boyd’s health issues persisted, she applied for short-term disability (STD) in early September 2023. Her request for STD was made in addition to her ongoing use of FMLA leave, as she needed extended time off to recover. However, on September 13, 2023, Cigna terminated Boyd’s employment, citing attendance issues as the reason for her dismissal. Boyd contends that her termination came at an unjust time, as her FMLA/STD applications were still pending. She also highlights that Cigna’s workforce management had previously approved her unpaid time off. According to Boyd, the company failed to adequately accommodate her disability and did not engage in an interactive process to explore reasonable solutions for her health-related needs. Instead, she argues, the company retaliated against her by terminating her employment. Allegations of ADA and FMLA Violations The core of Boyd’s lawsuit is centered around two major federal laws: the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). ADA Discrimination and Retaliation: Boyd claims that Cigna violated her rights under the ADA by failing to accommodate her medical conditions and by retaliating against her for requesting accommodations. She argues that Cigna was aware of her chronic health issues and should have made efforts to engage in an interactive process, which is required by law, to determine how best to support her continued employment. By terminating her, she believes the company punished her for seeking accommodations that were necessary for her health. FMLA Interference and Retaliation: Boyd also accuses Cigna of violating her FMLA rights. She states that her termination was a direct result of her taking FMLA leave to manage her chronic illnesses. Boyd argues that Cigna interfered with her lawful use of FMLA and retaliated against her for applying for short-term disability and using unpaid leave to attend to her health. The Plaintiff’s Requests for Relief In her lawsuit, Boyd is seeking several forms of compensation and restitution from Cigna Healthcare. She has asked the court for reinstatement to her former position with a salary and benefits package comparable to what she had before her termination. Additionally, she is requesting compensatory damages in excess of $150,000 for lost wages, back pay, and front pay. Boyd is also pursuing damages for emotional distress, alleging that the wrongful termination caused her significant personal hardship. Furthermore, she seeks punitive damages as a way to hold Cigna accountable for what she views as clear violations of her rights under federal law. Finally, she is asking the court to cover her legal fees and other associated court costs. The Case Moving Forward At this stage, the case is still in its early phases. Lauren Boyd is being represented by Mary LeMieux-Fillery from the Law Offices of Eric A. Shore P.C. No attorneys have been listed for Cigna Healthcare in the initial filings. This case could have far-reaching implications for employees with chronic health conditions and disabilities, as it may shed light on how large corporations manage requests for accommodations under the ADA and leave under the FMLA. As it progresses, the court will weigh the evidence from both sides to determine whether Cigna’s actions were in violation of federal law. Conclusion This lawsuit emphasizes the ongoing challenges faced by employees with chronic health conditions in maintaining their rights under the ADA and FMLA. Lauren Boyd’s claims against Cigna Healthcare, if proven true, could highlight the importance of employers engaging in meaningful discussions about accommodations and respecting an employee’s need for medical leave. This case serves as a reminder that employees should not be penalized for seeking accommodations for their disabilities or for taking legally protected leave to manage their health. The outcome of this lawsuit may provide further clarity on the responsibilities employers have in balancing attendance policies with the rights of employees facing health challenges. Read more at: pennrecord.com

Celiac.com 08/20/2024 - Captain Mark MacKenzie, a pilot diagnosed with celiac disease, has filed a lawsuit against United Airlines for failing to provide him with gluten-free food during flights. The lawsuit, filed in Colorado federal court on August 12, claims that United Airlines has neglected to make necessary accommodations for MacKenzie, a violation of his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This case highlights significant concerns about how airlines accommodate the dietary needs of employees with specific medical conditions. Background of the Case Captain MacKenzie, a seasoned pilot with over 35 years of experience and a clean flying record, is based out of Denver, Colorado. Due to his celiac disease, he must adhere to a strict gluten-free diet to avoid severe health complications. Celiac disease is an autoimmune disorder triggered by the ingestion of gluten, a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye. Exposure to gluten can cause various health issues, including digestive problems, malnutrition, and anemia, as outlined by the Mayo Clinic. Despite notifying United Airlines of his condition and requesting gluten-free meals, MacKenzie claims the airline has failed to provide appropriate accommodations. The lawsuit emphasizes that United Airlines not only refuses to supply him with gluten-free food but also charges him for meals he cannot consume due to his medical condition. This, according to the lawsuit, constitutes discrimination under Title I of the ADA, which requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities. Impact on Captain MacKenzie The lawsuit details the significant impact United Airlines' actions have had on Captain MacKenzie. On one occasion, during an 11-hour duty day from Denver to Roatan, Honduras, and back, United Airlines allegedly did not provide him with any gluten-free food. As a result, MacKenzie was forced to endure the long flight without eating, leading to fatigue and potential health risks. This is not an isolated incident, as the lawsuit claims that MacKenzie often has to purchase his own meals while on duty, unlike other pilots who are provided with meals they can safely eat. In 2020, MacKenzie formally notified United Airlines of his celiac disease and the challenges he faces in accessing safe food during flights and layovers. Despite this, the airline has not made the necessary adjustments, leading to the current legal action. MacKenzie is seeking a court order requiring United Airlines to provide gluten-free meals, along with damages and reimbursement for legal fees. Legal and Ethical Implications This case raises important questions about the responsibilities of employers, particularly in industries like aviation, where employees are often required to work long hours away from home. Under the ADA, employers are legally obligated to provide reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities, which in MacKenzie’s case would mean offering gluten-free meal options. The failure to do so not only violates federal law but also endangers the health and well-being of employees like MacKenzie. Furthermore, the case touches on broader ethical issues concerning equal treatment in the workplace. Charging an employee for meals they cannot safely eat due to a medical condition could be seen as an unfair burden, particularly when other employees receive their meals at no additional cost. This practice could be viewed as discriminatory and may set a concerning precedent for how other employees with dietary restrictions are treated. Why This Case Matters to Those with Celiac Disease For individuals with celiac disease, the outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications. It underscores the challenges that people with celiac disease face in environments where access to gluten-free food is limited. If successful, MacKenzie's lawsuit could lead to stricter enforcement of ADA guidelines in the workplace, ensuring that employers take the dietary needs of employees with medical conditions seriously. Additionally, this case brings attention to the broader issue of accessibility and accommodation for people with dietary restrictions, particularly in industries like aviation, where employees may not have the ability to bring their own food or access alternative options easily. It highlights the need for greater awareness and sensitivity towards the needs of those with celiac disease and other similar conditions, advocating for a more inclusive and supportive work environment. In conclusion, Captain Mark MacKenzie’s lawsuit against United Airlines is not just a legal battle over meal accommodations; it is a critical test of how companies should treat employees with medical conditions that require special dietary considerations. The outcome of this case could set a precedent that may influence policies across various industries, ensuring that individuals with celiac disease receive the necessary support and accommodations in their workplaces. More: newsweek.com

Celiac.com 06/17/2019 - A federal appeals court reinstated a lawsuit filed by a boy with celiac disease against a Colonial Williamsburg restaurant. The court ruled that a jury should decide whether the restaurant violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when they barred a boy from bringing his gluten-free meal into the Shields Tavern. The lawsuit lists the boy's name as J.D. Because J.D. has celiac disease and follows a strict gluten-free diet, he couldn't eat with his classmates on their May 11, 2017, field trip. The staff at the Shields Tavern told J.D. that they could make a gluten-free meal for him, but they could not allow him to eat his own food in the tavern, which is owned and operated by the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. J.D. had had problems before with gluten-free restaurant meals that were not, in fact, gluten-free. Since he hadn't eaten at Shields Tavern before, he declined their offer to make him a gluten-free meal. Because of Shields Tavern rules against outside food, J.D. was forced to eat a homemade meal apart from his friends and teachers. J.D. may have facts on his side. A recent study shows that most gluten-free restaurant food contains gluten. J.D.'s father chose to sue the foundation, arguing it violated the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act and the Virginians with Disabilities Act. The initial lawsuit was dismissed before trial by U.S. District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith, who held that J.D. did not show that he suffered discrimination because of his disability. In a 2-1 ruling that reinstated J.D.'s lawsuit, Judge Albert Diaz, writing for the majority, noted that Shields Tavern has high gluten-free meal standards that may be okay for most people with celiac disease, and a jury might decide they are good enough. But, added Diaz, “The district court incorrectly overlooked the testimony that J.D. repeatedly became sick after eating purportedly gluten-free meals prepared by commercial kitchens. Until a jury resolves the disputes surrounding the nature and extent of J.D.’s disability, we cannot determine if the accommodation Shields Tavern offered, as good as it may be, fully accounted for his disability.” Read more at Richmond.com

Celiac.com 06/15/2024 - In recent years, there has been a notable increase in the number of online job applications that include questions about disability status. At least 50% of these applications now inquire whether applicants have a disability, with celiac disease often listed as a potential disability. This trend raises important questions about the nature of celiac disease and whether it should be classified as a disability on a job application. While recognizing the challenges faced by individuals with celiac disease, it is crucial to critically examine whether it fits the standard definition of a disability, especially considering that adherence to a gluten-free diet typically leads to a symptom-free state. Understanding Celiac Disease Celiac disease is an autoimmune disorder where the ingestion of gluten leads to damage in the small intestine. Gluten is a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye. For individuals with celiac disease, even a small amount of gluten can trigger an immune response that damages the villi of the small intestine, leading to nutrient malabsorption and various symptoms, such as gastrointestinal issues, fatigue, and anemia. The Gluten-Free Diet as a Solution The primary treatment for celiac disease is a strict, lifelong gluten-free diet. Adherence to this diet usually results in the healing of the intestinal lining and the resolution of symptoms. Most individuals with celiac disease who follow a gluten-free diet for several months to a couple of years can achieve a symptom-free state and lead normal, healthy lives—without any issues that would interfere with work—especially if the job is remote work (yes, even remote jobs where you would work from home are now asking this question). Celiac Disease and Disability: Definitions and Implications The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. This definition includes conditions that are episodic or in remission if they would substantially limit a major life activity when active. Understanding how the ADA applies to work and jobs is crucial for both employers and employees, as it ensures that individuals with disabilities have equal access to employment opportunities and workplace accommodations. The ADA prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in all aspects of employment, including hiring, firing, promotions, job assignments, training, benefits, and any other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. It applies to private employers with 15 or more employees, as well as to state and local government employers, employment agencies, and labor unions. Under the ADA, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees with disabilities, unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the business. Reasonable accommodations are modifications or adjustments to a job or work environment that enable a person with a disability to perform essential job functions. Examples of reasonable accommodations include: Making existing facilities accessible Restructuring a job Modifying work schedules Acquiring or modifying equipment Providing qualified readers or interpreters For individuals with celiac disease, reasonable accommodations might include ensuring access to gluten-free food options in the workplace, providing flexibility in break times to allow for safe eating practices, or allowing remote work if gluten contamination in the workplace is a concern. The Case for Skepticism Symptom-Free State and Normal Functioning The primary argument against categorizing celiac disease as a standard disability is the fact that individuals with the condition can achieve a symptom-free state through dietary management. Once on a gluten-free diet, the majority of people with celiac disease do not experience limitations in their daily activities or work performance. They are not substantially limited in any major life activity, which is a key criterion for defining a disability under the ADA. If someone with celiac disease can bring their own food to work, of if they can work from home and fully control their food, it's very unlikely that a worker would ever be considered disabled to the point where it would affect their ability to perform their job. Comparisons with Other Disabilities Comparing celiac disease with other disabilities that inherently limit life activities can be illuminating. For example, conditions like multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, or severe mental health disorders often have persistent symptoms and functional impairments despite treatment. In contrast, celiac disease, when managed with diet, does not typically present ongoing challenges or impairments that affect daily functioning. The Impact of Labeling Celiac Disease as a Disability Potential Benefits There are potential benefits to recognizing celiac disease as a disability. It can ensure that individuals with the condition receive necessary accommodations, such as access to gluten-free food options at work or understanding from employers regarding their dietary needs. It can also provide legal protections against discrimination. Potential Drawbacks However, labeling celiac disease as a disability can also have drawbacks. It may lead to unnecessary stigmatization or misconceptions about the capabilities of individuals with the condition. Employers might mistakenly believe that people with celiac disease require significant accommodations or are frequently ill, which is not the case for those adhering to a gluten-free diet. This could inadvertently affect hiring decisions and job opportunities. Navigating Job Applications Transparency and Honesty When faced with the question of disability status on job applications, individuals with celiac disease must navigate a complex landscape. Honesty is paramount, but so is understanding the implications of disclosing a condition that, when managed, does not cause substantial limitations. If someone with celiac disease has been symptom-free for a considerable period due to a strict gluten-free diet, they may not feel the need to disclose their condition as a disability. Caption: An actual job application—how would you answer? Legal Considerations Legally, it can be permissible for individuals with well-managed celiac disease to answer "no" to the disability question if their condition does not currently limit any major life activities. The ADA defines a disability based on the presence of substantial limitations, and if those limitations are effectively mitigated through diet, an individual may reasonably determine that they do not meet this criteria. However, it's important to note that the ADA also considers conditions that are episodic or in remission, meaning that if the person were to consume gluten, their major life activities would be substantially limited. Thus, while saying "no" can be legally justifiable, it is crucial for individuals to consider their specific circumstances and the potential need for future accommodations when making this decision. Consulting with a legal or HR expert can provide additional clarity and ensure compliance with ADA guidelines. Rethinking Disability Categories Criteria for Disability The inclusion of celiac disease in disability categories invites a broader discussion about what constitutes a disability. The criteria should focus on the extent to which a condition limits major life activities despite management or treatment. If a condition can be effectively managed to the point where it no longer imposes substantial limitations, its classification as a disability should be reconsidered. Individualized Assessments Rather than blanket classifications, individualized assessments might offer a more nuanced approach. Evaluating the specific circumstances and needs of each person with celiac disease can ensure that those who genuinely require accommodations receive them, while those who do not are not unnecessarily labeled. Conclusion The increasing inclusion of celiac disease in disability categories on job applications warrants critical examination. While it is crucial to protect the rights and accommodate the needs of individuals with celiac disease, it is equally important to recognize that effective dietary management typically leads to a symptom-free and fully functional state. Classifying celiac disease as a disability for all individuals may not reflect the reality of those who have successfully managed their condition through a gluten-free diet. A more nuanced, individualized approach to disability classification and disclosure may better serve the interests of both job applicants and employers, fostering a more accurate understanding of celiac disease in the workplace.

Celiac.com 05/14/2024 - Concerns have been raised among the celiac disease community regarding Chick-fil-A's alleged practice of charging extra for gluten-free sandwich buns. Attorneys, in collaboration with ClassAction.org, are investigating whether this surcharge constitutes discrimination against customers with celiac disease, wheat allergies, or gluten intolerance. Chick-fil-A patrons who require gluten-free options have reported being subjected to an additional fee for opting for gluten-free buns, which could amount to approximately $1.70 at certain locations. This discrepancy has prompted legal experts to question whether the surcharge accurately reflects the cost of the product and whether it unjustly targets individuals who must adhere to a gluten-free diet due to medical necessity. Legitimate Cost or Price Gouging? Under scrutiny is whether Chick-fil-A's policy violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a federal law designed to protect individuals with disabilities from discrimination. According to the ADA, establishments, including restaurants like Chick-fil-A, are prohibited from imposing surcharges on individuals with disabilities to cover the costs associated with providing them with necessary accommodations. The potential implications of such discriminatory practices extend beyond financial concerns. For individuals with celiac disease, wheat allergies, or gluten intolerance, access to safe and affordable food options is paramount to their health and well-being. If you are a Chick-fil-A customer affected by this issue, you are encouraged to fill out the form provided by ClassAction.org. Your input could contribute to the initiation of a class action lawsuit aimed at rectifying these discriminatory practices and ensuring fair treatment for individuals with dietary restrictions. Ultimately, this investigation highlights the importance of advocating for the rights and accessibility of individuals with celiac disease and other gluten-related conditions in all aspects of daily life, including dining out at restaurants. Chick-fil-A customers who paid extra for a gluten-free bun for your sandwich may fill out the form on the ClassAction.org. After you get in touch, an attorney or legal representative may reach out to you directly to explain how you may be able to help get a class action started. It costs nothing to speak with someone, and you’re not obligated to take legal action if you don’t want to.

Celiac.com 11/11/2023 - In a recent poll conducted by Celiac.com, participants were tested on their knowledge of gluten-free accommodations in various settings, shedding light on the prevailing misconceptions surrounding celiac disease and U.S. regulations. The results revealed a surprising divergence of opinions, indicating a need for clarity on the legal obligations of public schools, elderly care facilities, and airlines when it comes to providing gluten-free options. While some respondents demonstrated a solid understanding of the existing regulations, a significant number seemed to be navigating a web of misinformation. In this article, we delve into the poll findings, dissecting the nuances of U.S. laws to offer a comprehensive guide on what individuals with celiac disease can truly expect in terms of gluten-free provisions. From classrooms to care facilities to the friendly skies, we aim to dispel the myths and provide an accurate portrayal of the rights and responsibilities involved in accommodating gluten-free needs. Survey Snapshot: Unveiling Perceptions and Realities of Gluten-Free Accommodations In a recent poll conducted by Celiac.com, participants were quizzed on their understanding of gluten-free accommodations within various sectors in the United States. The results revealed intriguing disparities between public perception and actual regulations. Below are the poll questions, and results, and the correct response is bolded. Public schools must provide gluten-free meals to kids with celiac disease. True: 55% False: 45% Elderly care facilities must provide gluten-free meals to residents with celiac disease. True: 68% False: 32% Airlines must provide gluten-free snacks or meals to customers with celiac disease. True: 36% False: 64% These numbers not only shed light on the prevailing beliefs but also underscore the need for greater awareness regarding the rights and expectations of individuals with celiac disease. A Deep Dive into the Poll and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Under the ADA, are public schools required to provide gluten-free meals to students with celiac disease? The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not specifically require public schools to provide gluten-free meals to students with celiac disease. However, under the ADA, public schools are required to provide reasonable accommodations to ensure that students with disabilities have equal access to educational programs and activities. This could include dietary accommodations for students with celiac disease. In practice, some public schools choose to offer gluten-free meal options to accommodate students with celiac disease. The decision to provide gluten-free meals may depend on factors such as the number of students with dietary needs, available resources, and the school's commitment to ensuring equal access for all students. If you have a child with celiac disease who requires a gluten-free diet, it's advisable to work with the school to discuss your child's specific dietary needs and explore potential accommodations. This may involve collaborating with the school's food service provider and providing documentation from a healthcare professional to support the request for gluten-free meals. It's important to note that Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which applies to schools that receive federal funding, may also require schools to provide dietary accommodations for students with disabilities, including those with celiac disease. It's recommended to work closely with your child's school and healthcare professionals to ensure that their dietary needs are met. Under the ADA are public or private elderly care facilities required to provide gluten-free meals to residents with celiac disease? Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), public and private elderly care facilities are generally required to provide reasonable accommodations to meet the dietary needs of residents or patients with celiac disease. The ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, and celiac disease is considered a disability under the ADA. In the context of elderly care facilities, this means that if a resident or patient has celiac disease and requires a gluten-free diet for their health, the facility should make reasonable accommodations to provide gluten-free meals or ensure that the resident's dietary needs are met. This may include offering gluten-free menu options, ensuring proper food preparation to prevent cross-contamination, and working with healthcare professionals to address specific dietary needs. It's important for individuals with celiac disease or their family members to communicate their dietary needs with the staff at the elderly care facility, provide any necessary documentation or medical information, and collaborate with the facility to develop a dietary plan that meets their needs while complying with the ADA. Facilities should be willing to work with residents and patients to ensure their health and well-being, and the ADA requires them to make reasonable accommodations to achieve this goal. However, the specific accommodations and processes may vary depending on the facility and the individual's needs. Under the ADA are commercial required to provide gluten-free meals to passengers with celiac disease? Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), commercial airlines are not explicitly required to provide gluten-free meals to passengers with celiac disease. The ADA primarily focuses on non-discrimination and equal access for individuals with disabilities in various aspects of public life, including transportation. While airlines must ensure equal access to air travel, dietary requirements, such as gluten-free meals, fall under a different set of regulations and practices. However, many commercial airlines do offer special dietary accommodations, including gluten-free meals, as part of their in-flight services. Passengers with dietary restrictions, including those with celiac disease, can typically request special meals when making their reservations or by contacting the airline's customer service. Airlines often offer options like gluten-free, vegetarian, vegan, or other special dietary meals to accommodate passenger preferences and requirements. It's important for passengers with celiac disease to notify the airline about their dietary needs well in advance of their flight to ensure that the airline can make the necessary arrangements. Keep in mind that the availability and quality of gluten-free meals may vary among airlines, so it's a good idea to inquire about specific accommodations when booking your flight. Passengers with dietary restrictions should check with the airline they plan to travel with to understand their specific policies and options for special meals. Final Analysis: Navigating Dietary Needs Under the ADA The poll results underscore widespread misconceptions regarding gluten-free accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). While a significant portion incorrectly believed public schools, elderly care facilities, and airlines were obliged to provide gluten-free options, the reality is more nuanced. Public Schools: Public schools, although not explicitly mandated by the ADA, may choose to provide gluten-free meals as a reasonable accommodation. Successful advocacy for such accommodations involves collaborative efforts between parents, schools, and healthcare professionals. Elderly Care Facilities: In the realm of elderly care, the ADA necessitates reasonable accommodations for residents with celiac disease. Clear communication, documentation, and collaboration between residents and facility staff are pivotal in ensuring compliance with ADA standards. Commercial Airlines: Contrary to popular belief, commercial airlines aren't explicitly required by the ADA to furnish gluten-free meals. However, proactive communication with airlines can often result in suitable accommodations, emphasizing the importance of early notification and thorough understanding of each airline's policies. Empowering Individuals: This analysis reveals the need for improved awareness and understanding of ADA provisions related to dietary accommodations. Individuals with celiac disease and their advocates play a crucial role in fostering effective communication and collaboration to ensure their needs are met. While the ADA provides a framework for reasonable accommodations, it's essential to recognize the distinctions in how it applies to different settings. Navigating the landscape of gluten-free requirements involves proactive engagement, effective communication, and a collaborative approach between individuals, institutions, and healthcare professionals. As awareness grows, it is hoped that misconceptions will dissipate, fostering an environment where individuals with celiac disease can confidently assert their rights and enjoy equal access to various facets of public life. Source: Americans with Disabilities Act Title II Regulation

Celiac.com 03/29/2023 - We get a lot of questions from people about celiac disease, and celiac-related issues. One question we've seen a lot lately is: Is celiac disease is a disability? The short answer is yes. Celiac disease is considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), but the longer answer is more complex. Here's the rundown. ADA Became Law in 1990 The Americans with Disabilities Act is a law that aims to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities. The act was passed in 1990 and has since been expanded to cover a variety of disabilities, including those that are not immediately apparent to others. The ADA contains four main provisions that make it easier for people with disabilities to participate fully in society: The ADA prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of disability. The ADA prohibits discrimination against those with disabilities at the local or state government level. The ADA prohibits discrimination based on disability from businesses that offer goods, services, facilities, or accommodations to the public. The ADA requires telecommunications companies to take steps to make sure they can offer "functionally equivalent services" to individuals with disabilities. ADA Expanded in 2008 In 2008, the ADA was expanded to include "major life activities" such as eating, which means that individuals with celiac disease and gluten sensitivity are covered under the ADA. However, it is not always clear what accommodations are required under the law. The law requires public places and companies to provide access to people with disabilities, and prohibits employment discrimination based on disability. The ADA covers people with celiac disease and gluten sensitivity, and in theory, guarantees access to safe food. For example, in situations where safe food is not readily available, such as in jail or on a cruise, the ADA should require that accommodations be made for individuals with celiac disease or gluten sensitivity. Additionally, if an employer requires employees to attend a lunch meeting where the only food available is provided by the employer, the employer may be required to provide a gluten-free meal. In theory, public schools should also have to offer gluten-free lunches to students with celiac disease, although this is clearly not yet happening in most public schools. Many colleges now offer gluten-free menu options, and hopefully this will also spread to public elementary and high schools as well. Celiacs Often Have to Fight for Protection However, the reality is that people with celiac disease may still have to fight for accommodations, like gluten-free food, even if they are covered by the ADA. People with celiac disease or gluten sensitivity may need to advocate for themselves to receive accommodations under the ADA. They may need to provide extensive guidance to those preparing their food and potentially fight to force the institution in question to meet their needs. The ADA can help people with celiac disease or gluten sensitivity in certain situations, like requiring safe food in an emergency shelter or in prison, and allowing people to bring their own gluten-free food to places where safe food won't be available. However, it cannot force a private restaurant to provide gluten-free food. While it may not always be clear what accommodations are required under the law, it is important for individuals with disabilities to do their best to understand their rights, and to advocate for themselves as necessary. Read more at verywellhealth.com

08/01/2018 - A federal appeals court has ordered a new trial for a terminated worker who sued a staffing company for allegedly violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by not accommodating her celiac disease. Laurie Peterson suffers from celiac disease, and worked as a staffing supervisor for Troy, Michigan-based Kelly Services Inc. until her termination in January 2014 according to court papers filed in Laurie Peterson v. Kelly Services Inc. Peterson had originally sued Kelly in U.S. District Court in Spokane, Washington, alleging failure to accommodate, discrimination and retaliation under the ADA. The original court issued a partial summary judgment granting Kelly’s motion on Ms. Peterson’s claims that the company had failed to accommodate her celiac disease and had fired her in retaliation for protected activity, but allowed related charges in the case to proceed. A jury later found that Kelly had not retaliated against Ms. Peterson. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a unanimous reversal of the district court’s original ruling. The panel wrote that the district court had “failed to construe the facts in the light most favorable to Peterson as the non-moving party as required on summary judgment.” The case originally arose out of Peterson’s work as interim district manager in fall 2013 while Kelly Services was looking for a new district manager. According to the complaint in the case, when the new district manager learned Ms. Peterson had celiac disease, he began treating her differently than other employees, including changing her work schedule. The change in work schedule allegedly caused Ms. Peterson stress and anxiety, which aggravated her celiac-related condition. Ms. Peterson sought to return to her previous 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. shift. According to the complaint, the district manager told Ms. Peterson to take unpaid leave under the Family Medical Leave Act instead of seeking an accommodation from the company. Peterson and the supervisor were later fired. In reversing the lower court and remanding for trial the claims decided on summary judgment, the court found that the district supervisor’s statement “is direct evidence of retaliatory intent.” The ruling added that the supervisor’s declaration “also raises a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Kelly Services engaged in the interactive process in good faith.” Ms. Peterson’s battle against Kelly Services, Inc., has important implications for how companies treat people with celiac disease under the ADA. To find out how the retrial turns out, keep an eye on Celiac.com Source: businessinsurance.com

Celiac.com 11/19/2013 - There's an interesting take on the precedent-setting ruling issued early in 2013 by the U.S. Justice Department, which found that celiac disease and other serious food allergies and sensitivities can be considered disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ruling arises from a settlement between the Justice Department and Lesley University in Cambridge, Massachusetts that came after Justice investigated the university in response to a student complaint that the school’s mandatory meal plan did not provide sufficient gluten-free food alternatives, and that the school did not accommodate the needs of those on gluten-free diets by excusing their participation in the meal plan or providing a reasonable alternative. The ruling has led a number of colleges and universities with student meal programs to make efforts to offer suitable options for students with celiac disease and other serious food allergies. However, Janet Raasch, points out in a blog entry on lawyers.com that the ruling applies more broadly to schools and restaurants at large. Raasch says that "…schools, restaurants and other places that serve food can be exposed to legal challenges if they fail to honor requests for accommodations by people with celiac disease." It's important to remember that Ms. Raasch is not a lawyer. So, while she has an interesting take, and it remains to be seen if gluten-free options become more numerous partly out of a push for restaurants and other food service establishments to follow in the footsteps of colleges and universities with student meal programs. What do you think will be the impact if schools, restaurants and food purveyors treat celiac and other food allergies as an ADA disability? Will it mean more gluten-free options? Better standards? Share your comments below. Source: blogs.lawyers.com Post by Janet Raasch