News & Insights

SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON ADA RIGHTS FOR FORMER EMPLOYEES

On June 24, 2024, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of a retired Florida firefighter who argued that the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) allows a former employee to sue over discrimination with respect to post-employment benefits that the former employee earned during their employment.  In the case of Stanley v. City of Sanford, 83 F.4th 1333 (11th Cir. 2023), a firefighter took disability retirement due to complications of Parkinson’s disease. Sanford maintained a retirement health insurance subsidy fringe benefit that covered insurance costs for qualifying retirees until age 65. After the firefighter began her job, Sanford reduced the coverage period for employees who retired as a result of full disability.

The firefighter retired and received the subsidy for 24 months before it was discontinued. She has alleged that this policy change is biased against disabled workers in violation of the ADA. The Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied her claims, holding that the firefighter was not a “qualified individual” under the ADA at the time of the alleged discrimination and therefore lacked standing. The Eleventh Circuit concluded that because the firefighter no longer wanted to work, as evidenced by her voluntary retirement, she lost her right to sue for discrimination.

The Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits have reached the same conclusion as the Eleventh Circuit. However, there is a split in authority within the Second and Third Circuits as they have held that employees can sue for discrimination regarding post-employment benefits. This case could resolve a split among six federal appellate courts over whether ex-employees have the right to sue under the ADA over discriminatory post-employment policies.

Employers should keep themselves apprised of the Supreme Court’s decision, as this will affect their ability to change post-employment benefits. Further, if employees are allowed to bring suit for discrimination, employers could be hit with expensive litigation over those benefits.