Feb 15: Rude Treatment of Customer Can Spark ADA Lawsuit

Sometimes employees get frustrated. Sometimes they even act rudely. But a new ruling highlights a legal risk you may not have thought about: Employee’s rude treatment can quickly turn into an ADA lawsuit if the customer is disabled. A New York court last week called the problem a “failure to train” case:

Case in Point: Alice Camarillo is legally blind. She can only read large type that’s close to her face. She frequents fast food restaurants near her home, including a Taco Bell, Burger King, McDonalds and Wendy’s. She has informed employees at the restaurants that she is legally blind and unable to read the menus.

When she’s asked employees to read the menus to her, Camarillo claimed she was “made fun of, stared at and forced to wait until other customers behind her in line were served.” Even then, she said, employees responded with annoyance and only read parts of the menu.

Camarillo filed an ADA lawsuit, claiming that the failure to provide large print menus violated the ADA. A lower court dismissed her case on the grounds that employees always read the menus to her and she was never turned away from the restaurants.

But Camarillo filed an appeal taking a different approach: that the restaurants failed to train their employees in the proper handling of disabled employees. Thus, they didn’t take necessary steps to make sure customers aren’t treated different due to their disabilities. (Camarillo v. Carrols Corporation, 2nd Cir., 2/8/08)

How did this case end … and what lessons can be learned?

The restaurants argued that they weren’t liable because the ADA doesn’t protect against rude and insensitive employees. However, the appeals court rejected that defense and sent the case to trial, saying this was more than just an issue of rudeness:

“Rather, defendants failed to adopt policies or procedures to effectively train their employees how to deal with disabled individuals. Such a failure to train can constitute a violation of the ADA, which requires owners of public accommodations …’to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals.’”

3 Lessons Learned …Without Going to Court

1. Don’t let training slide. To avoid liability, all employees need to be effectively trained on anti-discrimination laws. “Failure to train” lawsuits are growing as courts look to employers training programs for compliance under federal laws.

2. Customer service is about compliance, too. While good customer service is always a best practice, this case shows it also has big legal consequences. As part of training, teach practical skills that all employees can use when interacting with customers and co-workers with disabilities.

3. Extend your policy to third parties. Remember, as a best practice, that your anti-discrimination policy doesn’t apply only to your employees. It also applies to third parties, including customers, clients, vendors, etc. Communicate that throughout the organization.
Posted by Mindy Chapman in ADA Comments: (6) Trackbacks: (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 - Sarah 2008-02-15 14:56 - (Reply)

Seems to me like it might end up being more cost-effective for the fast food chains to have large-print menus on hand. They already offer Braille and picture menus, why not large-print ones as well. [I’ve come to expect bad customer service (no smile, sullen attitude) just about everywhere these days.]

#2 - me 2008-02-15 15:03 - (Reply)

Just a crazy question. If she is legally blind, how could she tell they were staring at her??

#2.1 - Suzanne 2008-02-15 15:06 - (Reply)

missing the point - maybe you should go to training with all the other employees.

#2.2 - D 2008-02-15 16:22 - (Reply)

To be legally blind does not mean that you can’t see. “According to the entry on blindness in the Yahoo! Health Encyclopedia, anyone with vision worse than 20/200 that cannot be improved with corrective lenses is considered legally blind. In addition, people with a visual field of less than 20 degrees diameter (10 degrees radius) are also considered legally blind.” (Yahoo.com, accessed: February 15, 2008)

#3 - Vicki 2008-02-15 15:59 - (Reply)

As an H.R. manager, it’s gets frustrating trying to accommodate every persons “needs”. My rule of thumb: how would I want my mother to be treated in that same situation.

#4 - Charlene 2008-02-18 10:39 - (Reply)

It seems that we will never understand until the “shoe is on the other foot.” It’s not as important to us until we’re the victim or maybe our disabled child or other family member. Unfortunately,sometimes it takes a court case to bring these situation to light.


Add Comment

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA 1CAPTCHA 2CAPTCHA 3CAPTCHA 4CAPTCHA 5