From: Kelly Pierce 
Subject: woman fired for *not using talking cmputer.
The times are a-changing.  The court ruled below that a social service 
agency was within its right to fire a blind employee who rejected a 
computer with speech synthesis to handle her paperwork, insisting on a 
cctv instead.  When that didn't work, she aquesed to the computer, only 
to demand training from her employer.  When her performance showed no 
progress because she wasn't getting the hang of the talking computer, she 
demanded a reader.  when her employer developed a pperformance 
improvement plan that focused on the computer but no reader, the woman,  
Ellen Smith, balked and refused to sign it.  she charged discrimination, 
which the court did not accept. 
I wonder if this is a sign that employer's are accepting adaptive 
technology as effective accomodations for blind persons.  I wonder also 
if the woman was so resistant to the talking computer because she didn't 
know how to use one and eas unfamilar with the benifits.
kelly 
            Copyright (c) 1997 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
                            (Article No. 41962316)
Disabilities Discrimination
OHIO CLINIC DID NOT VIOLATE ADA
IN DISCHARGING UNPRODUCTIVE, BLIND COUNSELOR
 
   WASHINGTON (BNA) -- An Ohio clinic did not violate the Americans with
Disabilities Act by discharging a blind counselor who refused to sign a
performance improvement plan, when she failed to meet productivity standards
after more than a year on the job, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit.
 
   Even if plaintiff Ellen Smith could prove that the Blick Clinic failed to
reasonably accommodate her to perform her job,  the appeals court said, she
could not show that the clinic or its managers discharged her because of her
disability. "Smith's refusal to sign a commitment to embark on a program of
improvement constituted a sufficient, non-discriminatory, cause for
termination," the court said, in affirming a lower court's summary judgment
in favor of the employer (Smith v. The Blick Clinic Inc., CA 6, 96-3246,
7/3/97).
 
   Smith was hired in 1992 as a counselor-trainee at the Blick Clinic, a
not-for-profit organization that provides counseling, diagnostic, and
treatment services to people with developmental disabilities. Virtually blind
from birth, she has an artificial right eye and, because of glaucoma, very
little vision in her left eye. The clinic management selected her for the job
in part because they felt she could serve as a model for clients and invited
her to make suggestions for ways to accommodate her disability.
 
   The job required a substantial amount of paperwork, which Smith initially
told the clinic she felt she could manage with the help of her closed-circuit
television which displayed written material on a large screen. She declined
the clinic's suggestion that she be provided with a computer equipped with a
voice synthesizer. After six months on the job, however, her performance was
deficient and she agreed to begin using the "talking computer," which was to
be ordered by Blick. As another accommodation, she was given additional time
to complete certain patient reports, but she was also informed that she
needed to improve her productivity.
 
   Smith's performance improved over the next three months, but then, in the
court's words, "things went downhill from there." Smith was farther behind in
her paperwork and her productivity diminished further. Her supervisor set out
certain benchmarks for her to meet within 90 days in order to keep her job.
Smith objected in writing to the evaluation. She noted that she had only
received  the special computer recently and had not been trained on it. The
clinic agreed to give her an additional 15 days to meet the stated goals.
 
   Three months later, with the computer still not "up and running," Smith
asked for a reader to help with her paperwork. That request was not addressed
by management, however, and soon afterwards, Smith was told she had not
accomplished her goals. The clinic developed another performance improvement
plan, containing weekly benchmarks and told Smith she would be fired, if she
did not sign the plan. Smith, unhappy with the plan and unsure that she would
be assigned a reader, refused to sign the document and was fired. She filed
suit under the ADA, claiming her former employer failed to provide reasonable
accommodation of her disability, but a federal judge granted the clinic's
motion for summary judgment.
 
   Affirming the lower court, the Sixth Circuit found no violation of the
federal disabilities law.
 
   The court cited Smith's acknowledgment that the reason for her termination
was her refusal to sign the performance improvement plan, and determined that
the employer had acted legally.
 
   "Blick deemed this (the refusal to sign the document) insubordination, and
was within its right in thinking it to be so," the appeals court said. "An
employer is entitled to insist that an employee, disabled or otherwise,
subscribe to a remedial program aimed at the employee's satisfaction of the
employer's standards."
 
   The employer, the court added, could not legally have made the request if
it was only a  pretext for discrimination, but Smith provided "nothing more
than allegations" to support that theory. If Smith had signed the improvement
plan, as she was ordered, she still could have argued that the plan failed to
accommodate her, the court observed.
 
   "We conclude that, under the circumstances, Smith's refusal to sign a
commitment to embark on a program of improvement constituted a sufficient,
non-discriminatory, cause for termination," the court said. "That being the
case, even if Smith could prove at trial that Blick failed to make reasonable
accommodations that would have allowed her to perform her job, Smith cannot
show that Blick or the individual defendants discharged her solely by reason
of her handicap. Therefore, we hold that the district court properly granted
summary judgment to Blick."
 
   Judges Danny Boggs, Alice Batchelder, and Martha Daughtry joined in the
opinion.
 
   -- By Nancy Montwieler
---
---------------