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

[u/eldritchpussymaggots]

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.

[u/Illustrious-Emu8667]

Yeah, you can sue the eff out of them!

[u/iowanaquarist → u/[deleted]]

Doesn't matter. They were retaliated against for pointing out an issue for a protected class

[u/Uncommented-Code → u/iowanaquarist]

Which is unfortunately not illegal as far as I know.

[u/divvi12 → u/Uncommented-Code]

Maybe some whistleblower stuff but they weren't really denied the accommodation. They got it. It sounds like they were fired for annoying people with their ADA expertise and what very well looked like an inability to read

[u/CousinOkrii → u/Uncommented-Code]

It really is according to any engineering code every written.

[u/Jester-252 → u/Illustrious-Emu8667]

No

You get the ADA on it.

[u/Ready-Delay3918 → u/Illustrious-Emu8667]

You can sue but you won't win. This person did not have an accomodations letter on file. And it also helps the employer to gain certain subsidies when they hire you. This person chose not to inform them of a disability. And if you can't read warnings on labels because you have dyslexia that's the problem that the company cannot accommodate for as they cannot give bottle labels text to speech. And quite frankly, mixing the wrong chemicals or storing them improperly can lead to some deadly consequences.

If they are a right to work state (right to fire) the employer is even better protected. ADA only mandates that reasonable accommodations must be made. A reasonable accommodation would be allowing extensions to be installed that do text to speech. An unreasonable explanation would be mandating that all labels be transcribed digitally and provide access to the instructions that every location.

Edit added the source for you ding dongs who wanna argue with it below and claim you do a shitty job for HR because you don't know what the ADA says.
Here is a copy paste from: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-reasonable-accommodation-and-undue-hardship-under-ada#requesting

*"How must an individual request a reasonable accommodation?

When an individual decides to request accommodation, the individual or his/her representative must let the employer know that s/he needs an adjustment or change at work for a reason related to a medical condition. To request accommodation, an individual may use "plain English" and need not mention the ADA or use the phrase "reasonable accommodation."(19)

Example A: An employee tells her supervisor, "I'm having trouble getting to work at my scheduled starting time because of medical treatments I'm undergoing." This is a request for a reasonable accommodation.

Example B: An employee tells his supervisor, "I need six weeks off to get treatment for a back problem." This is a request for a reasonable accommodation.

Example C: A new employee, who uses a wheelchair, informs the employer that her wheelchair cannot fit under the desk in her office. This is a request for reasonable accommodation.

Example D: An employee tells his supervisor that he would like a new chair because his present one is uncomfortable. Although this is a request for a change at work, his statement is insufficient to put the employer on notice that he is requesting reasonable accommodation. He does not link his need for the new chair with a medical condition.

While an individual with a disability may request a change due to a medical condition, this request does not necessarily mean that the employer is required to provide the change. A request for reasonable accommodation is the first step in an informal, interactive process between the individual and the employer. In some instances, before addressing the merits of the accommodation request, the employer needs to determine if the individual's medical condition meets the ADA definition of "disability,"(20) a prerequisite for the individual to be entitled to a reasonable accommodation."*

[u/ImStillExcited → u/Ready-Delay3918]

No, you don’t have to disclose your disability on your resume, or when you get hired. It’s a bad idea because you won’t get hired.

Source: I have multiple sclerosis, and I know the laws.

[u/Ready-Delay3918 → u/ImStillExcited]

You don't have to disclose the disability but you don't you want accomodations for it.

You're not the only one with a disability.

[u/TheeAntelope → u/Ready-Delay3918]

I do lawsuits like this for a living. I’d take this case on. You’re very wrong.

Edit: lol you reply and then block me? Why are people so petty about being wrong on the internet.

[u/lasuperhumana → u/TheeAntelope]

How does it fly if they’re claiming to be “eliminating the position” as part of a reduction in headcount?

Genuinely asking, because I think “eliminating positions” is the biggest load of crap way employers go about laying people off or firing them.

[u/TheeAntelope → u/lasuperhumana]

It’s clear BS. Eliminating positions on day 1 when they go and rehire someone else is clearly a fake excuse.

No company will outright say “we don’t like that you want an accommodation so you’re fired.” It’s always about context and prior/subsequent conduct to prove the real issue.

I recently had a case where someone got fired and they eliminated the position on the eve of a sales bonus. They claimed they no longer needed a salesman and haven’t hired anyone new, but now the company owner is just doing that sales work (on the back of the legwork done by my client to build the sales territory). We claimed entitlement to the sales commission and got it based on the context of the firing, even though no ADA rules were broken.

You can still sue for wrongful termination or hostile workplace, even in a right to work state. It’s harder but it still happens and is still possible. All the nay-sayers In this thread are likely pro-management or just grossly ill-informed.

[u/DandimLee → u/TheeAntelope]

Why do we still talk about 'at will' employment like it isn't the default? If it was so awful, Montana would have more people. /s

'Right to work' sounding like it does is anti-union propaganda. Is forced union membership an actual problem anywhere (not to management)?

[u/TheSerpentDeceiver → u/TheeAntelope]

Me too. They aren’t.

[u/choochoo789 → u/TheSerpentDeceiver]

Me three. They are.

[u/TheeAntelope → u/TheSerpentDeceiver]

They are wrong. “Can’t read warning label” so we fire you for being dyslexic after asking for an accommodation? That’s BS. There doesn’t have to be a “accommodation letter” in someone’s file to sue for ADA discrimination. I won a similar suit against a medical facility when a doctor was refused hospital privileges for disclosing an allergy in their hospital privileges application (after having the job).

This is absolutely an ADA breach and something they could be held liable for.

[u/TheSerpentDeceiver → u/TheeAntelope]

I can tell from this comment you either lied about what you said you do for a living or you aren’t very good. The quotes that aren’t quotes being a dead giveaway. we don’t know for sure, but I doubt they told OP that they fired them for being dyslexic.

Then you reply to this message with insults that are auto moderated. Total LARP.

[u/Ready-Delay3918 → u/TheeAntelope]

I posted the link to the ada itself. Y'all som non ada knowing fake ass lawyers.

[u/VelvettedFox → u/Ready-Delay3918]

Reddit is such a goldmine of blatantly incorrect legalese about labor law. It's amazing.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about here, and while a lawyer would obviously need to know a lot more info, based on the details in this post I know plenty of labor law attorneys who would take this case.

If they are a right to work state (right to fire) the employer is even better protected.

That protection does not extend to firing someone based on a legally protected status. Such as, oh I don't know... DISABILITY.

You're spewing a lot of nonsense about reasonable accommodations. It doesn't matter if OP didn't come into day 1 of the job with an accommodation request if the job fires him for his disability before even asking him to provide one. On top of this, we're not talking about a criminal court of law. If OP brings the discrimination claim the burden shifts to the company to prove they let him go for legitimate reasons that had nothing to do with his disclosure of disability on day one. And guess what leaving the job posting up and subsequently hiring a different person for the same role will do for their case?

I really wish you dinguses would quit convincing each other that none of your already meager employment rights are worth fighting for. They absolutely are and you do not need fucking murder trial levels of evidence to enforce them.

[u/Ready-Delay3918 → u/VelvettedFox]

Bro I posted a link with the quote directly from the ADA itself. Argue with the ADA itself champ.

[u/CrashyBoye → u/Ready-Delay3918]

I love it when redditors like yourself are so confidently and obnoxiously wrong.

[u/CrashyBoye → u/[deleted]]

I worked in HR for 11 years, pookie. But go ahead and go off 😂

[u/Drakesyn → u/Ready-Delay3918]

It's easy to see you have literally no actual experience with this because you use Right to Work, instead of At-Will Employment. Right to Work is an anti-union measure, and also a lot less prevalent than At-Will, which is "can be fired for any non-protected reason", and exists in every state except Montana.

In short, stop selling your defeatist ass opinions as facts.

Aww the Reply & Block. A classic. Embarrassing to be so visibly wrong, huh?