Employment Discrimination Law - Sixth Circuit Denies Standing to Former Smployees under Title I of Americans with Disabilities Act - McKnight V. General Motors Corporation

By Dolan, Jeffrey E. | Suffolk University Law Review, Spring 2010 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Employment Discrimination Law - Sixth Circuit Denies Standing to Former Smployees under Title I of Americans with Disabilities Act - McKnight V. General Motors Corporation


Dolan, Jeffrey E., Suffolk University Law Review


Employment Discrimination Law--Sixth Circuit Denies Standing to Former Employees Under Title I of Americans With Disabilities Act--McKnight v. General Motors Corporation, 550 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2008)

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), an employer may not discriminate against an employee on the basis of a disability with respect to most aspects of employment, including the provision of fringe benefits. (1) In order to have standing to bring suit under Title I of the ADA (Title I), a plaintiff must be a "qualified individual" with a disability. (2) In McKnight v. General Motors Corp., (3) the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit considered, in light of the United States Supreme Court's holding in Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., (4) whether disabled former employees have standing to bring suit under Title I "against their former employers for discrimination with respect to the payment of post-employment fringe benefits." (5) The Sixth Circuit held that Title I unambiguously excludes former disabled employees and denied standing to the plaintiffs. (6)

Leroy McKnight, Nicholas Klayo, and Robert Griffin (plaintiffs)--former employees of General Motors Corporation (GM)--accepted supplemental early retirement options provided in their pension plans. (7) The GM pension plans required GM to pay these early retirement benefits until a retiree became eligible for Social Security benefits. (8) The plan further provided that once a retiree became eligible for Social Security benefits, an amount equal to the Social Security payment would be deducted from the early retirement supplement. (9) After retirement, all three plaintiffs became disabled and successfully applied for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits (SSDIB). (10) As a result, their retirement benefits were reduced by the amount received in SSDIB. (11)

McKnight filed suit against GM in federal district court, alleging that the provision requiring a deduction in early retirement benefits upon qualification for Social Security violated the ADA. (12) The complaint was later amended to add the other plaintiffs because they had similar claims. (13) The district court granted GM's motion for summary judgment after determining that the plaintiffs lacked standing under Title I. (14) The plaintiffs then appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which affirmed the district court's judgment that the plaintiffs lacked standing under Title I. (15)

Congress enacted the ADA in 1990 to provide the same protection against discrimination to people with disabilities that had been available under federal law to victims of discrimination on the basis of sex, race, and other traits under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (16) Title I of the ADA prohibits employers from discriminating against a "qualified individual" on the basis of his or her disability with respect to most aspects of employment. (17) The statute defines a qualified individual as "an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires." (18) The Sixth Circuit first addressed whether Title I's definition of qualified individuals excludes former employees in Parker v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (Parker I). (19) In Parker I, the Sixth Circuit examined the plain language of the statute and held that the plaintiff lacked standing because she could no longer perform the essential requirements of her job with or without reasonable accommodation, and was thus not a qualified individual. (20) At the time the Sixth Circuit decided Parker I, other circuits also construed Title I as inapplicable to former employees who were no longer able to perform their jobs. (21)

Shortly after the Sixth Circuit issued Parker I, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., (22) which held that the term "employees" in section 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 included former employees.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Employment Discrimination Law - Sixth Circuit Denies Standing to Former Smployees under Title I of Americans with Disabilities Act - McKnight V. General Motors Corporation
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?