The Daily Star has been covering the story of Edmond Marchi, who is on paid leave as administrator at Otsego Manor due to alleged intoxication while driving and on the job (Feb. 7).
This letter is not about Mr. Marchi but rather to clarify the intent of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The ADA has been cited in articles as a possible means for Mr. Marchi to be reinstated. Alcoholics have very limited coverage under the ADA.
"An employer can discipline, discharge or deny employment to an alcoholic whose use of alcohol adversely affects job performance or conduct." (US DOJ ADA home page.)
"The ADA may ... require consideration of reasonable accommodation for a drug addict who is rehabilitated and not using drugs or an alcoholic who remains a `qualified individual with a disability.’" (DBTAC-Northeast ADA Center "" Cornell University)
The key is "rehabilitated," as in not currently using alcohol. Automatically applying the ADA to someone found using or abusing alcohol on the job is inaccurate and irresponsible. While the ADA is a federal civil rights law designed to be applied individually to qualified people with a disability, any person "actively" using alcohol on the job is subject to the same rules and regulations as everyone _ they can be fired for violating company policy. Assuming Otsego Manor has policy prohibiting alcohol use on the job, Mr. Marchi can legitimately be dismissed from his job for using or abusing alcohol while at work. To assume otherwise would be setting a dangerous precedent, i.e., anyone who uses alcohol on the job, even in violation of company alcohol policies, is protected under the ADA and cannot be fired.
If that were the case, we would have a society full of "drink now and pay later" employees using the ADA to justify their personal actions.
Laurene Reichardt
Oneonta
Reichardt is disability programs manager at Catskill Center for Independence.