781 F. Supp. 2d 1080
D. Or.2011Background
- Plaintiff Hayes, Jewish and of a particular race, was hired by Wal-Mart Stores East L.P. on August 31, 2004 as a '5th Shift DAR Unloader' at DC 6037 in Hermiston, Oregon.
- He received an RC forklift license in April 2005 and had a medical leave around late 2005 to early 2006, with additional intermittent leave through January 2006.
- Hayes sustained a work-related injury on August 21, 2006, and took a leave of absence through September 29, 2006, after which he returned to light duty until December 20, 2006.
- In December 2006 Hayes submitted a partially completed Reasonable Accommodation Form but did not sign a Release of Medical Information; correspondence continued through 2007.
- In May 2007 defendants initiated an investigation; Hayes was excused from work but paid; later in September 2007 he alleges wage cessation after complaints.
- On December 7, 2007, termination paperwork and an Exit Interview form were added to Hayes’s file, with signatures in early December.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disability disparate treatment | Hayes claims ADA/Oregon disability discrimination with adverse actions. | Precludes as incomplete proof of disability-based adverse actions. | Issues of fact remain; summary judgment denied on some disability-based actions. |
| Race/Religion disparate treatment | Hayes alleges anti-Semitic, religious discrimination and differential treatment. | Cannot show treating similarly situated non-members differently; performance disputed. | Questions of fact remain; summary judgment not warranted on these claims. |
| Accommodation pre-July 2006 | Requests for accommodations were ignored or inadequately addressed before July 2006. | No clear notice or documented accommodation requests; pre-Aug 2006 process lacking. | Pre-July 2006 accommodation claims granted summary judgment for defendants. |
| Accommodation from July 2006 | Defendants failed to engage in a proper interactive process and obtain medical documentation. | Plaintiff refused form and failed to provide necessary medical information; interactive process was not properly engaged. | Summary judgment for defendants on post-July 2006 accommodation claims. |
| Workers' compensation retaliation | Termination and adverse actions were tied to filing a workers' compensation claim. | Termination and actions based on legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons; no pretext shown. | Defendants entitled to summary judgment on workers' compensation retaliation claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- McGinest v. GTE Serv. Corp., 360 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir.2004) (disparate treatment framework and evidence standards)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., 510 U.S. 17 (Supreme Court 1993) (hostile environment standard elements)
- Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (Supreme Court 1998) (hostile environment factors and employer liability)
- Nichols v. Azteca Rest. Ent., Inc., 256 F.3d 864 (9th Cir.2001) (employer liability for harassment; knowledge and action)
- Barnett v. U.S. Air, Inc., 228 F.3d 1105 (3d Cir.2000) (low threshold for notice in interactive accommodations)
- Kratzer v. Rockwell Collins, Inc., 398 F.3d 1040 (8th Cir.2005) (interactive process and accommodation notice standards)
- Mole v. Buckhorn Rubber Prods., Inc., 165 F.3d 1212 (8th Cir.1999) (employee must inform employer of needed accommodation)
- Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch. Dist., 184 F.3d 296 (3d Cir.1999) (notice and interactive process in accommodation cases)