The Ninth Circuit case McAlindin v. County of San Diego is a case of great help to those employees who have been diagnosed with and suffering from anxiety disorder or panic disorder. In that case, the employer first argued that the employee’s condition wasn’t a protected disability within ADA because it didn’t substantially limited that employee’s daily life activities, as required under the law. The court rejected that argument, noting that Plaintiff’s difficulty sleeping, difficulty engaging in sexual relations, and his challenges and often complete inability to interact with others showed how his anxiety and panic disorder affected his daily life activities, and thus likely made him a qualified disabled employee within the statute.
The employer next argued that it did what it could to reasonably accommodate Plaintiff. The County stated that the employer’s policy of terminating employees for sleeping on the job insulated the County from liability for terminating the Plaintiff for being drowsy and sleeping on the job, even though the employer knew that the same sleeping and drowsiness was caused by the plaintiff’s anxiety medication. The court rejected that argument as well, noting first that the essence of the concept of reasonable accommodation is that, in certain instances, employers must make special adjustments to their policies for individuals with disabilities, the ADA places a duty to accommodate on employers in order to remove barriers that could impede the ability of qualified individuals with disabilities to perform their job. The court stated that the issue is whether deviating from the policy and making special arrangements to allow the disabled worker to continue to be employed, such as being transferred to another position or making other adjustments, would have imposed an undue hardship on the employer. The County was not able to prove that it couldn’t make these adjustments.
This case has a strong and very helpful language to those many employees who suffer from one or more of the mental disorders or conditions, including panic attacks, anxiety disorder, PTSD, depression, etc. This case shows how the employer cannot get off the hook by not putting a good faith effort into help the employee, who struggles with his own mental condition, to remain part of the workforce.