Wenzel V. United States Irac Essay

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 888 words ( 3 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 1

Page 1 of 3



The inability to perform a single, particular job does not constitute a substantial limitation in the major life activity of working, and a disability as defined by the ADA must significantly restrict a major life activity. The inability to perform a single, particular job like lifting does not constitute a substantial limitation in the major life activity of working. However, to demonstrate that Missouri-American regarded him as unable to perform a class of jobs, Wenzel emphasizes that there was no lifting requirement in the written job description and that a Missouri-American manager testified that his injury substantially impaired a major life activity.

However, an employer may decide under the terms of the ADA that individuals with some limiting, but not substantially limiting, impairments to certain life tasks make a candidate less than ideally suited for a particular job and the position required Wenzel's position required heavy-lifting and working with a shovel, pickaxe, and jackhammer. Although his employer was in error when he believed Wenzel's inability to lift heavy items was permanent, employers are free to make decisions based upon mistaken evaluations and not be penalized so long as the decisions are not based in intentional discrimination.

Conclusion:

The courts concluded that Wenzel had suffered no adverse affects from the employment decision which meant that he had not met the terms of defining himself as 'discriminated against' under the terms of the ADA. After Wenzel filed a disability discrimination claim, there was almost no change in Wenzel's employment status as he held the title of Utility III Throughout the period in question and received the amount of pay (after arbitration and mediation) appropriate for all 18 months of leave.

Stuck Writing Your "Wenzel V. United States Irac" Essay?

View All Our Example Wenzel V. United States Irac Essay

Have A Custom Example Essay Written

The four-month delay returning to work after his second injury, when Wenzel submitted his second relief was not the result of retaliation. The company requested a second opinion, as was their right, and Wenzel delayed providing this second opinion, which delayed his return to work.

As Wenzel failed to make a prima facie case, the case was dismissed. An employee must demonstrate that the discrimination was the result of a materially adverse action that was "more disruptive than a mere inconvenience or an alteration of job responsibilities," in other words there "must be a material change in employment status," such a reduction in title, salary, or benefits. The ADA was ruled as inapplicable to the situation, as Wenzel had not met the full, stipulated burden and thus the employer had no burden to meet.

Works.....

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"Wenzel V United States Irac" (2008, December 22) Retrieved June 5, 2026, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/wenzel-united-states-irac-25657

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"Wenzel V United States Irac" 22 December 2008. Web.5 June. 2026. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/wenzel-united-states-irac-25657>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"Wenzel V United States Irac", 22 December 2008, Accessed.5 June. 2026,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/wenzel-united-states-irac-25657
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example