Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. BNSF Railway Co.

Railroad Worker Loses Disability Discrimination Case Against BNSF

This case involved Kent Duty, a railroad worker who sued BNSF Railway Company claiming disability discrimination, retaliation, and failure to provide reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The court ruled in favor of BNSF Railway, rejecting all of Duty's claims. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Duty could not prove he was actually disabled under the ADA because his medical condition did not substantially limit his ability to perform major life activities. The court also determined that BNSF did not view or treat him as disabled, which would have been another way to establish ADA protection.

What this means for workers: This ruling highlights how challenging it can be to prove disability discrimination under the ADA. To qualify for ADA protection, workers must show either that they have a condition that substantially limits major life activities, or that their employer regarded them as having such a disability. Simply having a medical condition is not enough – workers need clear evidence that the condition significantly impacts their daily functioning. Employees considering ADA claims should carefully document how their condition affects their work and daily activities before pursuing legal action.