Rescinded job offer at heart of ruling
Reprints
Melvin A. Morriss III applied for a machinist job with Fort Worth, Texas-based BNSF Railway Co. in March 2011 and was offered employment contingent on a satisfactory medical review, according to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.
Mr. Morriss, who was 5 feet 10 inches and weighed 281 and 285 pounds at two physical exams, had a body mass index of more than 40, which was above the railway's standard for the measure of body fat based on height and weight.
The railway rescinded the job offer even though Mr. Morriss reported his overall health as “good.”
He filed suit in Omaha, Nebraska, in January 2013, alleging discrimination on the basis of his obesity, which he argued was a disability.
A federal judge dismissed the case, a ruling the 8th Circuit upheld in April.
Obesity alone is not a physical impairment despite enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment Act of 2008, which was construed in favor of broad coverage of individuals under the ADA, the court ruled.
But under both disability laws as well as Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations and interpretive guidance, “physical impairment” must be the result of an underlying physiological disorder and “the ADAAA's general policy statement cannot trump this plain language,” the appeals court ruled unanimously in dismissing the case.
Read Next
-
Employers urged to tread lightly on obesity
Despite an appeals court ruling that an obese job applicant is not necessarily entitled to protection under anti-discrimination laws, the legal landscape remains far from settled.
