Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=900015
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (245)



 


 



Disability, Disparate Impact, and Class Actions


Michael Stein


William & Mary Law School; Harvard Law School

Michael Evan Waterstone


Loyola Law School Los Angeles


Duke Law Journal, Forthcoming
Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2006-22

Abstract:     
Following Title VII's enactment, group-based employment discrimination actions flourished due to disparate impact theory and the class action device. Courts recognized that subordination which defined a group's social identity was also sufficient to legally bind members together, even when relief had to be issued individually. Interwoven through these cases was a notion of panethnicity that united inherently unrelated groups into a common identity, for example, Asian Americans. Stringent judicial interpretation subsequently eroded both legal frameworks and it has become increasingly difficult to assert collective employment actions, even against discriminatory practices affecting an entire group. This deconstruction has immensely disadvantaged persons with disabilities. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), individual employee claims to accommodate specific impairments, such as whether to install ramps or replace computer screens, have all but eclipsed a coherent theory of disability-based disparate impact law, and the class action device has been virtually non-existent in disability discrimination employment cases. The absence of collective action has been especially harmful because the realm of the workplace is precisely where group-based remedies are needed most. Specifically, a crucial but overlooked issue in disability integration is the harder-to-reach embedded norms that require job and policy modifications. The Article argues that pandisability theory serves as an analogue to earlier notions of panethnicity and provides an equally compelling heuristic for determining class identity. It shows that pandisability undergirds ADA public service and public accommodation class actions where individualized remedy assessments have been accepted as part of group-based challenges to social exclusion. The Article also demonstrates that this broader vision of collective action is consistent with the history underlying the class action device. Taking advantage of the relatively blank slate of writing on group-based disability discrimination, it offers an intrepid vision of the ADA's potential for transforming workplace environments. In advocating for a return to an earlier paradigm of collective action in the disability context, the Article also provides some thoughts for challenging race and sex-based discrimination.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 62

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 8, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Stein, Michael and Waterstone, Michael Evan, Disability, Disparate Impact, and Class Actions. Duke Law Journal, Forthcoming; Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2006-22. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=900015

Contact Information

Michael Ashley Stein (Contact Author)
William & Mary Law School ( email )
South Henry Street
P.O. Box 8795
Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
United States
(757) 221-3762 (Phone)
Harvard Law School ( email )
1563 Massachussetts Avenue
Pound Hall 423
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
617-495-1726 (Phone)
Michael Evan Waterstone
Loyola Law School Los Angeles ( email )
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,675
Downloads: 229
Download Rank: 76,058
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  245

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.281 seconds