> A blind acquaintance of mine once lost his job because of a newly added requirement that he use an inaccessible application.
IANAL, but wouldn't this be grounds for a lawsuit?
IANAL, but wouldn't this be grounds for a lawsuit?
I really wish HN contributors would not suggest the legal system as a solution for these types of problems, it's totally unrealistic.
If it's a clear cut case of discrimination, their association would help out. And the bad PR alone would not be worth to the company.
I found it's better to let go, for my own sake. It's very stressful and very easy for the situation to consume you, which isn't healthy and on balance you may be worse off if you factor this in. Everyone is different, and other people may experience these kind of things different, but I've seen the same in various other people, both publicly and in my private life.
Of course this really sucks and is very unfair. But it doesn't change it.
Its clear cut discrimination, sure, but discrimination based on disability is only prohibited if it is against “a person with a disability who meets all of a position's legitimate job requirements and can perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation.” [0]
The question isn't “is this discrimination” but is the requirement to use the software in question a “legitimate job requirement” and/or an “essential function” that the worker cannot do without accommodation, and for which no reasonable accommodation is available with which the worker would be able to perform the function.
[0] https://www.eeoc.gov/foia/eeoc-informal-discussion-letter-44