Lab tech with Asperger’s syndrome to get $60K

A national employment agency will pay $60,000 to a Frederick job applicant who claimed he was told to stop completing hiring paperwork after disclosing he had been diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, a disorder considered on the high-functioning end of the autism spectrum.

Atlanta-based Randstad US LP agreed to pay Jason O’Dell as part of a consent decree with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over claims that the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The EEOC sued Randstad in U.S. District Court in Baltimore in May 2011. The suit alleged Randstad would not let O’Dell apply solely because of his perceived disability. Before O’Dell’s disclosure, a company representative had told him he was qualified for the position it was trying to fill, the EEOC claimed in a case brought by its regional office in Philadelphia.

Debra M. Lawrence, the EEOC’s regional attorney, said the complaint and decree should send a message to employers.

“People have to be treated in the workplace according to their performance and their capabilities and not to fears, stereotypes and unwarranted assumptions,” she added.

The company denied the allegations and admitted no wrongdoing in agreeing to the decree, which Judge William D. Quarles Jr. approved last month.

“Randstad has a strong record of equal opportunity employment and is vigilant in complying with its obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all other employment laws,” the company said in a statement. “Randstad denies the allegations in the EEOC’s lawsuit and any wrongdoing with respect to Mr. O’Dell. The case was settled to avoid protracted and costly litigation.”

According to the lawsuit, O’Dell applied to Randstad for a “temp-to-hire” lab-technician position on Sept. 15, 2009. Within a week, a Randstad employee told O’Dell that based on his qualifications — which included a bachelor’s degree in biology — he could bypass the employment agency’s intake interview stage and apply for the job, the EEOC alleged.

On Sept. 22, 2009, O’Dell went to the Frederick office to complete the application paperwork.

During that process, O’Dell said he had been diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, the EEOC alleged. At that point, a Randstad employee ended the hiring process “immediately” and told O’Dell the lab-technician job he was applying for had been put “on hold,” the EEOC alleged.

But Randstad continued to fill that position as a temp, the commission claimed.

The company subsequently refused to refer O’Dell for other job assignments with its clients, EEOC added.

“The effect of the practices complained of … has been to deprive Mr. O’Dell of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect his employment status because of his actual and/or perceived disability,” the complaint said. “The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice or with reckless indifference to Mr. O’Dell’s federally protected rights.”

The EEOC filed suit after its “informal efforts” at conciliation with Randstad failed to resolve the commission’s concerns about the company’s treatment of O’Dell, the complaint said.

Under the consent decree, Randstad also agreed to permit O’Dell to register for and take up to 10 classes on the company’s online training center at no cost.

In addition, Randstad consented to provide two hours of on-site training to its new hires and employees in the Frederick office regarding their respective rights and obligations under the ADA. Randstad also agreed to make ADA compliance part of its training for all its employees nationwide.

The company will also add a non-discrimination statement to the website page on which it asks applicants for their work profiles. The statement will inform applicants they can contact Randstad personnel officers “if, because of a disability, [they] require reasonable accommodation for any part of the employment [and] let us know the nature of your request and your contact information.”

Randstad’s Maryland offices, numbering about a dozen, will also be required to post a “notice to employees” that the company is “fully committed to maintaining a workplace in which all applicants and employees are free from illegal discrimination, including discrimination based on disability [and] will not discriminate or tolerate any discrimination against employees or applicants on any impermissible basis, including disability.”

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION V. RANDSTAD US LP

Court:

U.S. District Court, Baltimore

Case No.:

1:11-cv-01303-WDQ

Judge:

William D. Quarles Jr.

Outcome:

Consent decree with $60,000 payment, injunctive relief.

Dates:

Event: Sept. 15, 2009

Suit filed: May 11, 2011

Consent decree approved: May 9, 2012

Plaintiff’s Attorney:

Thomas D. Rethage Jr., of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Philadelphia.

Defendant’s Attorney:

John S. Snelling of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP in Atlanta.

Count:

Disparate treatment in violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.