C-PALSY Archives

Cerebral Palsy List

C-PALSY@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Salkin Kathleen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
St. John's University Cerebral Palsy List
Date:
Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:23:36 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (74 lines)
No, that's not fair, and while we're at it, why hire older programmers at
all, AB or disabled?  They've been at the keyboards for years and so are
likely to be risks for CTS.

Sheeesh... I can see another case going up all the way to the Supreme Court.

Kat

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barber, Kenneth L." <[log in to unmask]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.c-palsy
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Decision Affecting ADA Rights


>   again i bring up a few of us that do the same type of work. if the
> emploers are allowed to say "look ken got ligament and tendon damage from
> straining to sit straight at a desk, so we will not hire KAT, because she
> has cp too", is that fair and right.
>   i know employers don't want to open themself up for workers comp cases,
> but, then again why discriminate against someone who will not get hurt.
and
> Lord knows, TABS see us as all the same. they do not know the differences
in
> cp. i have friends that i still after years have to remind them that i
have
> cp, not md.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kathy Salkin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 4:45 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Supreme Court Decision Affecting ADA Rights
>
>
> Well, yes, but we don't want the ADA language to become so restrictive
that
> basic decisions are taken out of our hands, such as whether to apply for a
> job or not.  I certainly would not want an employer to come along and say
I
> was out of a job because I had a greater chance of a heart attack due to
> stress or that I should not be working because I could fall and break my
> leg, which could conceiveably be a danger to my well-being and health,
just
> to protect future workers compensation expenses.  Unfortunately, as Kyle
> pointed out earlier, I can see employers taking yesterday's Supreme Court
> decision to the other end of the limits.
>
> Remember that all too often, the bottom line determines the actions, not
> fairness.
>
> Kat
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:27:15 EDT RIchard Hudson <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/11/02 1:37:27 PM !!!First Boot!!!,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
> > There's one guy in the shop here who keeps yelling, "ADA! ADA! ADA!",
> > everytime he gets a migraine.  Wants me to join in the fray, but I'm
> afraid
> > that he's going to get the pins knocked out from underneath us if he
> doesn't
> > shut his yap.
>
> This is why the ADA is TOO inclusive. and why proff of a disability should
> be
>  required.
>
> Richard Hudson

ATOM RSS1 RSS2