Back to the Marginally Useful Material Launcher.
More ADA Insanity
In an order issued by its Equal Opportunity Commission yesterday, April 29, 1997, the U.S. government clarified its official position concerning the requirements placed on employers by 1990's Americans with Disabilities Act in reference to qualified workers with mental illness.
The April 30, 1997 issue of the New York Times included an article that outlined the government's guidance to employers of mentally ill people. I recommend that you read this article in full. It is reproduced without the permission of the Times, but with full attribution. Since the Times placed it on their "for free" web site, I am just going to assume that they'll let me slide on it this time. Attention New York Times attorneys: I have no money anyway, and your client is getting a good plug, so why don't you be good little boys and girls and go sue someone else?Anyway, back to the outrage of the week. Any sane reader of this article must conclude that the EEOC has already hired quite a few mentally ill people. I'm not going to parse through the article word by word and point out just how impossible this guidance is to follow. Let it be sufficient to note that employers are presumed guilty of illegal job discrimination if they refuse to hire mentally ill people. The responsibility to prove that a given job category properly excludes mentally ill people is squarely on the employer. As the article says, "Cost is a factor that may be considered in assessing hardship, the EEOC said." What the HELL does that mean? If you're a rich company, or if the crazy people can be accommodated cheaply, you have to hire crazy people, but if they're really crazy, or if you're not a rich company, you don't have to hire crazy people? And you still think we live under the rule of law?
I've got a better idea. Here's my Equal Opportunity Rule: you can hire whomever the hell you want to hire, to do whatever work the two of you agree on, on whatever economic terms you mutually agree on. You can hire a crazy man to fly your corporate jet, or you can refuse to hire a crazy man to fly your corporate jet. And you don't have to prove to anyone that hiring a crazy man to fly your corporate jet would be a poor business practice. You can hire women in wheelchairs to be a bike messengers, or you can hire actual bike riders to be bike messengers. And you don't have to prove to anyone that women in wheelchairs are not as good at whizzing through crowded city streets as are agile young people on 12-speeds. You can hire blind people to be Major League umpires, or, well, they do hire blind people to be Major League umpires, don't they? And if you're a crazy person looking for a job, you can go to work for whomever is hiring crazy people, or you can do a really good imitation of a sane person.
Unfortunately for us non-crazy people, this Americans with Disabilities Act insanity is not going away any time soon, unless the Supreme Court comes up with a new constitutional protection for us. How about, "We have the inherent constitutional right to ignore totally silly federal laws?" No, that probably isn't going to happen. So, what to do? This ADA insanity, along with all the other bizarre employment laws, just reinforces the only conclusion you can reach concerning employment- don't do it. Do not hire anyone. Period. If you have a task that needs doing, contract with an independent business to do it. And if you have a service that you wish to provide, you'd better be figuring out ways to provide that service in a business setting instead of as an employee. That's the direction we're headed, and this EEOC ADA insanity about hiring crazy people is just the latest indication of that trend.
Have a comment? Not crazy about my position? Sendto rsturge@inreach.com
Back to my home place.