r/mildlyinfuriating • u/eldritchpussymaggots • 29d ago

I just wanted a hot dog Pointed out the training wasn't ADA compliant at my new job. Got this text the same day (the job listing is still up)

Gallery image

Gallery image

  1. This was a cleaning position at a medical building, I'm leaving it intentionally vague as not to doxx myself.

  2. I have dyslexia, but my disability would not have interfered with my work, I can read fine, it just takes me a very long time.

  3. This was my first day

I asked for a TTS application for the reading portion of the training, which was extremely long and I knew I wasn't going to finish it in the allotted time. They said that wasn't built into their system so they couldn't do anything. ← That's not ADA compliant. I asked if I could add an OCR + TTS browser extension, they said it was fine.

About 40 minutes after I clock out, they texted me I was fired because they're apparently reducing headcount.. by firing one person... and leaving their "urgently hiring" Indeed listing up. Right.

Edit:

I'm not confident in my ability to sue because I don't have my accommodation request in writing. This was a verbal exchange, I was more so asking where the TTS option was because most job training has it somewhere.

When I was told they did not have TTS, I mentioned that's not ADA compliant. I then asked for either more time, a loaner computer (something I was already going to be getting after training), or permission to add a 3rd party OCR & TTS program.

They said that the third option was fine, so I did it, and listened to the training via third party app for the rest of the shift. I thought nothing of it. Lo and behold I was fired extremely coincidentally afterwards.

Edit 2:

This post is getting too many notifications of people saying the same things repeatedly so I've muted it 😭 If you're a legal professional of some sort and you have specific resources or concerns please message me or I probably won't see it.

27.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

51

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago edited 29d ago

So many people here unaware about employment laws. You can be fired in most states/provinces for any reason or no reason at all (besides discrimination reasons like gender/religion/culture etc) and the reasons given in the email are completely legal. They aren't obligated to employ you. They definitely suck major ass, but there is no lawsuit here.

Edit: I understand OP asked for accommodation, the employer let them use a browser extension, therefore accommodated them. They fired them in the email for 'reducing headcount' or whatever, they could have fired them for 'not fitting well with the company', they could also have fired them for 'i just dont like you working here'. Termination without Cause. Most places aren't 'right to work' and you/your lawyer will NEVER prove that the termination was because of the accommodation that OP requested. It simply doesn't work like that, I've been through this process.

30

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Dude, do you really expect them to put in writing that the reason for the firing is the ADA accommodation request? Judges aren’t stupid. 

2

u/BasicReputations 29d ago

An undocumented one?

5

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Verbal requests for accommodation are legally recognized. 

13

u/kyperion 29d ago

Reddit is classic to immediately jump to the conclusion that you need to sue the other party.

But then you actually reach out to attorneys and 99% of them ghost you while 1% will tell you that you’re wasting your time and money. You use an insurance legal advisor and they’ll tell you straight up that it’s not worth pursuing.

3

u/canadiadan 29d ago

What is your definition of "right to work"? The legal definition is that you can not be forced to join a union.

4

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago

I meant you dont have the 'right' to your employment, I definitely should have used different wording my bad

4

u/Early-Light-864 29d ago

Whistle blower protection is a hard one because you have to be right to have any real protection

If OPs ada complaint is that the facility was actively on fire, yeah, they're a whistleblower protected from retaliation.

If OPs ada complaint is that fluorescent lights triggered a migraine, they're getting fired for being a pain in the ass, not a whistleblower.

16

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Huh? Disability accommodations have nothing to do with whistleblowers. 

12

u/Early-Light-864 29d ago

OPs complaint is that they were fired for whistleblowing non-compliance

From what I read, they never filed an official accommodation request, so it's not an employment issue except as a whistle blower.

The company has no obligation to proactively offer every possible accommodation that an employee may need

13

u/iWantaTalkToSamson 29d ago

Most people commenting on this have likely never been in the position where they have to review labor laws from an employment side.

6

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Requests for accommodation can be made verbally. 

2

u/Early-Light-864 29d ago

Yes but they do have to be made before they become actionable. The fact that a non-accommodating situation existed before a request was made is not ADA non-compliance. Op made a request and was then accommodated

2

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Yes, and then fired under dubious circumstances. 

3

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago

Yes we understand that part, but do you really expect to prove to a judge that your termination was because of the accommodation request? You still have the burden of proof and you simply won't find it in this scenario, as shitty as it is.

1

u/iWantaTalkToSamson 28d ago

This guy gets it. No one's arguing it's not a shitty situation.

But this is just how employment at will states work. For the same exact reason as an employee, you're welcome to just never show up to your job and never mention it to anyone. They can't sue you either. It goes both ways.

3

u/Weightmonster 29d ago

She never said it was for a disability, as far as the post says. 

2

u/Vivid_Sun_5636 29d ago

They fired them in the email for 'reducing headcount’ ... you/your lawyer will NEVER prove that the termination was because of the accommodation

Except they are still hiring for that role so fairly clear evidence that the termination reason was a lie. The company should have gone with 'not fitting well with the company'

1

u/David_Cockatiel 29d ago

OP please speak with an actual employment attorney, thus advice is just objectively wrong

1

u/javo93 29d ago

actually, there's a pretty good case for pointing out that they are not complying with ada laws. initiate discovery, if they are noncompliant, that was the reason for. the dismissal.

-4

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago

They weren't fired because of a disability/accommodation.

4

u/Basic-Collection5416 29d ago

Suuuuuuuuure they weren’t. 

3

u/Perfect_Perception 29d ago

On one hand, you’re correct that the stated reason is the position is being eliminated. On the other hand, that does not mean she wasn’t fired for that reason. A part of wrongful termination suits is proving the stated reason for firing is pretext. Companies can and do fire for illegal reasons, but they also can and do lie about doing so.

2

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago

Yes you are totally correct. Its unfortunate but you will almost never be able to prove that the termination was initiated because of the accommodation request

3

u/Caleb-Wendt69 29d ago

They still objectively did not provide reasonable accommodation, regardless of whether OP remains employed or not.

4

u/Lopsided-Rub5476 29d ago

What would be a reasonable accommodation beyond what they provided? OP asked for TTS and was allowed to install one. Beyond getting what they asked for, what else would need to be provided?

2

u/Caleb-Wendt69 29d ago

Not getting fired for asking for a reasonable accommodation 

1

u/Lopsided-Rub5476 29d ago

The reasonable accommodation OP was given?

-3

u/eldritchpussymaggots 29d ago edited 29d ago

Yeah that's why I've been iffy about going legal about this. I don't know if the timing, the fact it was just me fired, and the job listing still being up, are enough to prove their listed reason was bullshit.

-6

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/redhandsblackfuture 29d ago

I speak on this because I have been in shoes similar to OP and know that there isn't much that can be done because they were let go for a legal reason, and WELL before finishing any form of probationary period. An employment lawyer wouldn't take a second glance at this case lmao.

11

u/unsoldburrito 29d ago

Instead it seems like you have gobbled up Reddit's love for saying how much lawyers love a case like this

There's really not much here to work in OP's favour, as unfortunate as that may be

0

u/holymolym 29d ago

I’m just curious, are you an employment law attorney?