Walmart refused to hire me because of my amputation & now they owe me $40k – I sued and proved I could do the job

A WOMAN has claimed she was denied a job at Walmart because of her amputation, and now the retailer has to pay her tens of thousands.

Emily Hayman was born with a congenital amputation , resulting in her right arm ending at the elbow.

Getty

This occurs when a limb is not fully formed or is completely missing at birth, as the amputation occurs when the baby is still in the womb.

In 2018, Hayman applied to be a freight handler at a Walmart in Ochelata, Oklahoma , about 143 miles from Oklahoma City, and arrived at the facility to take a pre-employment test called the Physical Assessment Test.

The PAT requires lifting and carrying cartons that weigh up to 50 pounds.

Hayman was asked twice by Walmart officials if she needed help to complete the test but she declined both times, saying she could lift up to 150 pounds at the time.

However, Walmart’s hiring officials insisted on reaching out to the company’s accommodations representative to see if Hayman should be allowed to take the PAT.

A lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claims Hayman went on to tell the hiring officials that she did not need any accommodations to complete the test.

At that point, the representatives told Hayman that they could not help her.

She was ultimately denied the ability to take the PAT without an accommodating device.

The EEOC claims this alleged incident violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The law states that employers are barred from refusing to hire individuals based on any disability.

While the federal agency attempted to reach a pre-litigation settlement for Hayman, the EEOC ultimately filed a discrimination lawsuit against Walmart in September 2019 on behalf of Hayman.

The suit was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma.

One year later , the court ruled in Hayman’s favor.

Judge John E. Dowdell approved a two-year consent decree in the case, which ordered Walmart to pay Hayman $40,000 in damages.

Who gets to make the decision?

“Workers with disabilities are in the best position to determine their own capabilities,” Andrea Baran, the regional attorney for the EEOC in St. Louis, said in a statement.

“If an employer is concerned about whether a disabled worker can perform an essential job function or complete a pre-employment test, it should offer the worker a reasonable accommodation, but not require the worker to use an accommodation that is unnecessary.”

The order also now requires the major retailer to train its managers and human resources personnel at the Ochelata Distribution Center on how to interact with potential applicants that have obvious disabilities.

Andrea Baran, the regional attorney for the EEOC in St. Louis, said employers should not be making decisions on whether applicants and workers with disabilities can complete a task.

“Workers with disabilities are in the best position to determine their own capabilities,” Baran said in a statement.

“If an employer is concerned about whether a disabled worker can perform an essential job function or complete a pre-employment test, it should offer the worker a reasonable accommodation, but not require the worker to use an accommodation that is unnecessary.”

L. Jack Casquez Jr., the EEOC’s St. Louis District director at the time, said the federal agency is committed to ensuring workers with disabilities have equal access to jobs as those that don’t.

“Central to the EEOC’s mission is ensuring that disabled workers have equal employment opportunities without unlawful barriers,” he said.

“Unnecessary ‘accommodations’ hinder, rather than help, disabled workers’ employment opportunities.”

Walmart did not immediately respond to The U.S. Sun’s request for comment.