UPS "100% Release" Lawsuit

[Hawaii50]

I would never expect to this from a company that voted most ethical company by the magazine Ethisphere magazine. http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f6/ethical-315801/ and most admired company by FORTUNE magazine. http://www.transportweekly.com/pages/en/news/articles/71147/

You have to GOOGLE UPS Lawsuits to find the class action lawsuits. The link does'nt work on Browncafe.

Heres the basics of the class action.
Scott+Scott is litigating an employment discrimination action against United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”) under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) – Mark Hohider, et al. v. United Parcel Service, Inc., et al., and Branum v. United Parcel Service, Inc., et al., Consolidated Civil Action No. 04-0363 (W.D. Pa.). Unfortunately, on July 23, 2009 the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the July 16, 2007 decision of the District Court, granting class action status to all persons throughout the U.S. employed by UPS at any time since May 10, 2000 who were denied the ability to return to work at UPS after an illness or injury because of one or more of the following three policies: (1) UPS’s corporate-wide “100% healed” policy; (2) UPS’s allegedly discriminatory implementation of its formal ADA compliance policy; or (3) the allegedly discriminatory use by UPS of uniform pretextual job descriptions.

 

[cachsux]

Just a tip. All of these "most ethical, most admired,most etc" awards are from people and or organizations who have never worked a day for the company.

 

[moreluck]

Much like the Nobel Peace Prize won by Odrama , right?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Just a tip. All of these "most ethical, most admired,most etc" awards are from people and or organizations who have never worked a day for the company.

Much like the Nobel Peace Prize won by Odrama , right?

Is it just me or does anyone else not see the correlation between these two statements?

 

[tieguy]

the hiholder case has been going on for a while. not sure what it has to do with ethics. The company feels you should have a 100 percent release to return from disability. They feel asking for anything less puts them at risk of you re-injuring yourself and then putting the liability on them as a a work related injury.

is it an ADA case is it really one where your doctor has to reaffirm that you are able to do your job?

 

[RoyalFlush]

the hiholder case has been going on for a while. not sure what it has to do with ethics. The company feels you should have a 100 percent release to return from disability. They feel asking for anything less puts them at risk of you re-injuring yourself and then putting the liability on them as a a work related injury.

is it an ADA case is it really one where your doctor has to reaffirm that you are able to do your job?

The company is screwed in this case. The company is alleging that they do NOT require a 100% release. Its pretty clear that they do require a 100% release for disability, but not for comp. That's the conflict. Requiring a 100% release is a violation of the reasonable accommodation requirements of the ADA. Open the check book.

 

[SWORDFISH]

Just a tip. All of these "most ethical, most admired,most etc" awards are from people and or organizations who have never worked a day for the company.

+1

 

[tieguy]

The company is screwed in this case. The company is alleging that they do NOT require a 100% release. Its pretty clear that they do require a 100% release for disability, but not for comp. That's the conflict. Requiring a 100% release is a violation of the reasonable accommodation requirements of the ADA. Open the check book.

Reasonable accomdation has to be requested. The request can not interfere with the esential job requirements of the job. The check book was opened when this lawsuit was filed.