Jones v. Nationwide Life Insurance
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20217
1st Cir.2012Background
- Jones, a long-time employee in retirement program sales, faced a Series 65 licensing requirement to continue in ProAccount; he repeatedly delayed taking the license exams from 2006-2008.
- The Series 65 license was deemed an essential function of Jones's Program Director role for ProAccount sales by the employer.
- Jones failed multiple exam attempts within the permitted testing windows and controlled by FINRA, leading to progressive consequences for his employment status.
- Jones claimed a disability (and requested accommodation) due to brachial plexus palsy and pain medication use, but he continued performing most job functions other than the license requirement.
- The employer declined to extend deadlines, offered a transfer to a lower-paid open position, and terminated Jones on January 31, 2009 after he failed to obtain the license by the deadline.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jones was a qualified individual for his job | Jones treated as disabled adequacy | License essential; Jones failed essential functions | Essential function; Jones not qualified |
| Whether Jones's requested accommodation was reasonable | Extension could enable passing | Extension was untimely and unlikely to help | Accommodation unreasonable; district court affirmed |
| Whether there was a failure to engage in the interactive process | Employer failed to engage; sought accommodation | No viable accommodation established; no need for process | Interactive process not triggered; no viable accommodation found |
| Whether the ADA and MA law claims survive given the essential function finding | Disability under ADA/Chapter 151B | No disability/insufficient accommodation under standard | Claims fail; summary judgment appropriate |
| Whether the district court properly applied the law governing reasonable accommodation | Rehabilitation standards support extension | Law requires feasible, likely-to-succeed accommodation | Court affirmed judgment; accommodation not feasible |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (establishes prima facie case framework for discrimination claims)
- U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391 (2002) (reasonableness of accommodations and timing considerations)
- Reed v. LePage Bakeries, Inc., 244 F.3d 254 (1st Cir. 2001) (employer on notice and linkage of disability to accommodation)
- Evans v. Fed. Express Corp., 133 F.3d 137 (1st Cir. 1998) (unreasonable to require second leave when likelihood of success is uncertain)
- Ward v. Mass. Health Research Inst., Inc., 209 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2000) (framework for ADA/MA disability claims and accommodations)
- Walgreen Co. v. Ward, 679 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2012) (essential function and reasonable accommodation analysis respects employer judgment)