posted
ADA Amendment Means Increased Burdens for Employers Expected Increase in ADA-related Claims and Lawsuits Means Employers Need to Prepare Quickly
Last update: 10:39 a.m. EDT Sept. 30, 2008
OLD SAYBROOK, Conn., Sep 30, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Last Thursday, President George W. Bush signed into law a measure (S. 3406) that significantly amends the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). BLR(R) expects a significant increase in ADA-related claims and lawsuits will result and encourages employers to prepare quickly and in time for when the amendment becomes law -- Jan 1, 2009. "The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment (ADAA) provides broader protections for disabled workers and turns back the clock on Supreme Court rulings deemed too restrictive of disabled employees' rights," said Catherine L. Moreton, JD, Managing Editor for HR and Compensation at BLR. "The bottom line is that more employees will fit within the definition of disabled under the ADA and unless employers are prepared they will significantly increase their risk of lawsuits." To help understand the ADA amendments and its impact, BLR has made a number of resources available:
posted
I'm sure that will encourage business to stay in the United States! That is exactly the kind of STUPID regulation that is KILLING American business!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
Have you come accross any listing of exactly what changes were made, Glass? What else is now being considered as a 'disability'?
Also, I was wondering abourt this part...
"The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment (ADAA) provides broader protections for disabled workers and turns back the clock on Supreme Court rulings deemed too restrictive of disabled employees' rights," said Catherine L. Moreton, JD, Managing Editor for HR and Compensation at BLR. "The bottom line is that more employees will fit within the definition of disabled under the ADA and unless employers are prepared they will significantly increase their risk of lawsuits."
Is this trying to go against previous rulings? That would set it up for a major challenge in courts.
IP: Logged |
posted
it is trying to redefine more precisely what disabiltiy is. the Supreme court (has by 7-2 votes) argued that people with a treatable condition are not disabled... such as a person who can wear glasses, or take medication for conditions like diabetes...
basically the Court was saying that if you can mitigate your disability? then you shouldn't be categorized as disabled..
Bush the First is the one who passed the original bill, and the Supreme court was considered "callous" in it's definitions, so this is another case of Dubya trying to "rescue" his dad's "legacy"
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
basically the Court was saying that if you can mitigate your disability? then you shouldn't be categorized as disabled..
That seems fairly straightforward. If it is within the power of the employee to control the effects of one's 'condition' (whatever it is), I would think that it shouldn't fall upon the employer to adapt the work environment to meet the needs of one who chooses not to.
IP: Logged |
posted
And what of those that would choose to were they able?
SF, your arrogant and simple mind just doesn't get it. Not every person that is suffering or isn't rich is so by some action or agent of his choice.
IP: Logged |
posted
Once again, Bdgee, I have to ask you if you've read the preceding posts. My statement was a summary of the Supreme Court ruling Glass discussed above.
IP: Logged |
posted
Not every person that is suffering or isn't rich is so by some action or agent of his choice.
I agree with you one hundred percent, Bdgee. That being said, I would also ask you and everyone else here one important question...
Do you not know even one person that is stagnant in their lives due to no other factors than their own personal choices?
If the answer is no, then you and I have a very different set of personal experiences and we are never going to be able to see eye to eye because of it. If the answer is yes, then do you believe that they are the exception or the rule?
IP: Logged |
posted
what would be even more interesting is if you could find a map with a true poverty rating instead of the "official" govt rating which is really about 50% of true poverty...
According to the National Center for Children in poverty, most families of four would have to make twice their assigned Poverty Threshold in order to provide their children with basic necessities, such as housing, food, and health care.
the children don't CHOOSE to be born into poverty, and most people in poverty were raised in poverty...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: what would be even more interesting is if you could find a map with a true poverty rating instead of the "official" govt rating which is really about 50% of true poverty...
According to the National Center for Children in poverty, most families of four would have to make twice their assigned Poverty Threshold in order to provide their children with basic necessities, such as housing, food, and health care.
the children don't CHOOSE to be born into poverty, and most people in poverty were raised in poverty...
And I accept that both of those statements are true, Glass. Do you believe that being born into poverty means that you CANNOT ever rise above it?
IP: Logged |
posted
And I accept that both of those statements are true, Glass. Do you believe that being born into poverty means that you CANNOT ever rise above it?
of course not, but you live in a place where opportunity abounds because of an unusaul set of socioeconomic circumstances...
just as the place i currently live has an unusual set of socio-economic circumstances...
you can't compare the problems of the place where i currently live to the southern Ohio/ Kentuck/WV poverty problems either..
but they have one thing in common, they do not teach their children well at any of these places...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: what would be even more interesting is if you could find a map with a true poverty rating instead of the "official" govt rating which is really about 50% of true poverty...
According to the National Center for Children in poverty, most families of four would have to make twice their assigned Poverty Threshold in order to provide their children with basic necessities, such as housing, food, and health care.
the children don't CHOOSE to be born into poverty, and most people in poverty were raised in poverty...
And I accept that both of those statements are true, Glass. Do you believe that being born into poverty means that you CANNOT ever rise above it?
As is proved by a simple glance through census data,
YES,
almost 100% of the time, unless some governmental effort intercedes to make escape from that status feasible.
Oh, of course, there may be a rare incident of some guy that was spending half (or more) of his disposable income on lottery tickets holding a winner.
I'm more concerned about the many many thousands that, based on the hope of winning, are, like that one rare case, spending money they can't afford to on those lottery tickets while baby Jannie Anne only gets part of the nutrition she needs and has to wear dirty diapers because there aren't clean ones.
IP: Logged |
posted
I am truly sorry to hear that you believe that, Bdgee.
It makes me wonder where all those stories about parents who work two or more jobs to send their children through college come from. I also wonder about all those stories about average joes that invent some great product or business that makes them their fortunes. I add to that the stories of many of the successful members of minorities like Sharpton, Jackson, Cosby, Powell and others that currently make far more than I do and when asked how they got there they respond with hard work and dedication.
I wonder where those stories come from....
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: I am truly sorry to hear that you believe that, Bdgee.
It makes me wonder where all those stories about parents who work two or more jobs to send their children through college come from. I also wonder about all those stories about average joes that invent some great product or business that makes them their fortunes. I add to that the stories of many of the successful members of minorities like Sharpton, Jackson, Cosby, Powell and others that currently make far more than I do and when asked how they got there they respond with hard work and dedication.
I wonder where those stories come from....
citing individual cases is easy SF...
the real problem is that about half the population of this country lives at or just above the true poverty level of 40,000$ per household...
as for hard work? i cannot tell you how many people think glassblowing is really coooollll, and want to try it, for about a half hour
i also can't count how many "glassblowers" don't have a studio to work in because they can't scrape 100K$ together, or put in one year of work after they do that to build one...
most people do shy away from hard work IMO...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
the real problem is that about half the population of this country lives at or just above the true poverty level of 40,000$ per household...
And I accept that as fact, Glass. My concern with using that statistic though, is what do we as a society consider needs vs wants. I've seen true poverty while in Brazil. Our poverty generally includes microwaves, cars, tv's etc. It's in confusing the two that makes most stay in poverty.
as for hard work? i cannot tell you how many people think glassblowing is really coooollll, and want to try it, for about a half hour
i also can't count how many "glassblowers" don't have a studio to work in because they can't scrape 100K$ together, or put in one year of work after they do that to build one...
No doubt. I rank glass blowers right up there with sculptors and other higher artists. To create something from raw materials is truly outstanding to me.
most people do shy away from hard work IMO...
And that sadly, has been my point all along.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: And that sadly, has been my point all along.
most of those people are working poor tho...
it's no longer an issue of living "off the land" either...
that was a leading reason for poverty, people were able to live with very little cash...
This is something that I think has been misunderstood about my position, Glass. I don't think that many(or even most) of those in poverty are lazy, contrary to what Bdgee and Mach have tried to read into my statements on this board.
What I do think is that many have not(or could not for whatever reason) changed with the changing economy. Darwinism can be applied to personal economics just as easiliy as businesses. If one business can do a job better\cheaper than another (as we see with chinese goods currently), then it will survive and thrive in comparison to it's competitors. To believe that this doesn't translate to the individual is foolish imo. In a tightening economy, the family\person that doesn't cut wants to provide for needs is in a poor position to excel and misses oportunities due to inability to pursue them.
This is what I see with the ever expanding luxury markets here in the USA. Toys, like 4-wheelers, flat screen tv's, more and more expensive cars\trucks\suv's, boats, huge houses, and other items that aren't needs are being sold to (understand, not just marketed to, but actually purchased by) people who really should be allocating those funds to something like debt reduction or future planning. Dave Ramsey and a few others have even made a fortune trying to teach people how to change that trend in their own lives and put themselves in positions to weather the storm and even prosper in bad times.
But how many are really listening?
I concede without hesitation that some of the bankrupcies and forclosures that occur are actually outside the control of the individuals involved. However, I truly believe that many if not most of them could have been avoided with a couple of simple choices:
First, don't buy the huge house just so you can look like you have more money than you do. There is no shame in living in a smaller home than your friends, family, etc. You are sheltered from the elements and have a place to raise your family.
Second, same with cars, the old Saturn will get you to work just the same as the new Prias. A car payment that is as high as a quarter of your monthly income is just stupid, imo.
Third, toys (as I listed above) are for when the debts are paid and should never put you in debt again in order to purchase them. If you can't pay for it outright, don't get it.
Last, put something away for a rainy day; storms happen in all our lives.
Four choices that would have most people climbing the economic food chain far easier than our current society is trending.
Now, I want to go back to one thing you said above:
but they have one thing in common, they do not teach their children well at any of these places...
So what do we; you, I and the other parents on this board, teach our children? I only see two options (as it realates to the current discussion). One, we teach as Bdgee claims to believe that if you aren't born 'rich' you can't ever become such. This not only demotivates them, it teaches them that no effort is the better option, as working hard is, well, hard. And if there is no way that hard work will matter, then why struggle at all? The second option, teaching them that the sky is the limit if one has the will, teaches them that they have to make their own chances. That hard work will take you exactly as far as you choose to the limit you're willing to sacrifice to acheive. This is far more empowering in my opinion.
Which do you teach your children? The fact that you own your own business (not the easy or safe route) applying a skill that wasn't easy to come by (many years of refinement of abilities) should answer the question, but I would like to hear the words you use to tell them what you believe on the subject (if you don't mind sharing).
IP: Logged |
quote:the real problem is that about half the population of this country lives at or just above the true poverty level of 40,000$ per household...
The REAL PROBLEM is that anyone would believe that a household making $40,000 per year is at or near the poverty level. This is just another example of the excess that is destroying our country. What constitutes poverty? If a person doesn't have a big screen TV, are they in poverty? I don't have a big screen TV, but a LOT of my Section 8 tenants do. If a person doesn't have a $500,000 McMansion, are they in poverty? If a person rents instead of owning a house, does that mean they are in poverty? GIVE ME A BREAK! We have the richest poor people in the world right here in the United States! What we really need is a new definition of poverty.
quote:I don't think that many(or even most) of those in poverty are lazy, contrary to what Bdgee and Mach have tried to read into my statements on this board.
That is exactly opposite to what I see in the real world. In my real world experience, most of these people ARE lazy. Worse yet, the number of lazy people is growing all the time, with the continuous increase in government handouts and the rate at which these low income people are breeding. What we have is a country of victims who have been created by the socialist left. These people are constantly told that they are victims (by the left and people like Bdgee) and have been convinced that their role in society is to receive government handouts. The truth is that we don't have a huge number of poor people that are being helped by government handouts, the truth is that we have incentivized millions of people to be lazy with the handouts! If you want to look at the root cause of poverty in the United States - look no further than Bdgee and the socialist left who push handouts on people.
IP: Logged |
posted
The REAL PROBLEM is that anyone would believe that a household making $40,000 per year is at or near the poverty level.
do you know how to make a budget? try out a basic budget for 4 on 40K$... it doesn't work.
big screen TV? that's all i ever hear from you...
big screen TV's have nothing to do with poverty other than that they make people "lazy" ... they are a one time cost of $500 to 1000$ not an investment.. most of 'em in your neighborhood were prolly stolen or rented to own at Aarons anyway..
as for mcmansions? at minimum they will be 250 grand... and that's not a real mcmasnion, that's just 30,000$ of add-ons to "regular house"...
that requires at absolute minimum a take home pay of 6000$ which in case you didn't know is 72,000 per year
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
do you know how to make a budget? try out a basic budget for 4 on 40K$... it doesn't work.
The problem with a figure like that is that it doesn't take into consideration cost of living differences which exist between different states. I don't make too much more than that and I support my family of four just fine. That same wage in Cali probably would have you in a bread line. It's all regional.
My question still stands to any who would care to take it up. What do you teach your children? Hard/smart work pays off, or whatever 'caste' you're born into determines your financial fate?
IP: Logged |
quote:What do you teach your children? Hard/smart work pays off, or whatever 'caste' you're born into determines your financial fate?
Of course, I've taught my children that they can be whatever they want to be. Hard work is the key to success. I have also taught them that they are NOT a victim and that THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES and their actions.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: And that sadly, has been my point all along.
most of those people are working poor tho...
it's no longer an issue of living "off the land" either...
that was a leading reason for poverty, people were able to live with very little cash...
This is something that I think has been misunderstood about my position, Glass. I don't think that many(or even most) of those in poverty are lazy, contrary to what Bdgee and Mach have tried to read into my statements on this board.
What I do think is that many have not(or could not for whatever reason) changed with the changing economy. Darwinism can be applied to personal economics just as easiliy as businesses. If one business can do a job better\cheaper than another (as we see with chinese goods currently), then it will survive and thrive in comparison to it's competitors. To believe that this doesn't translate to the individual is foolish imo. In a tightening economy, the family\person that doesn't cut wants to provide for needs is in a poor position to excel and misses oportunities due to inability to pursue them.
This is what I see with the ever expanding luxury markets here in the USA. Toys, like 4-wheelers, flat screen tv's, more and more expensive cars\trucks\suv's, boats, huge houses, and other items that aren't needs are being sold to (understand, not just marketed to, but actually purchased by) people who really should be allocating those funds to something like debt reduction or future planning. Dave Ramsey and a few others have even made a fortune trying to teach people how to change that trend in their own lives and put themselves in positions to weather the storm and even prosper in bad times.
But how many are really listening?
I concede without hesitation that some of the bankrupcies and forclosures that occur are actually outside the control of the individuals involved. However, I truly believe that many if not most of them could have been avoided with a couple of simple choices:
First, don't buy the huge house just so you can look like you have more money than you do. There is no shame in living in a smaller home than your friends, family, etc. You are sheltered from the elements and have a place to raise your family.
Second, same with cars, the old Saturn will get you to work just the same as the new Prias. A car payment that is as high as a quarter of your monthly income is just stupid, imo.
Third, toys (as I listed above) are for when the debts are paid and should never put you in debt again in order to purchase them. If you can't pay for it outright, don't get it.
Last, put something away for a rainy day; storms happen in all our lives.
Four choices that would have most people climbing the economic food chain far easier than our current society is trending.
Now, I want to go back to one thing you said above:
but they have one thing in common, they do not teach their children well at any of these places...
So what do we; you, I and the other parents on this board, teach our children? I only see two options (as it realates to the current discussion). One, we teach as Bdgee claims to believe that if you aren't born 'rich' you can't ever become such. This not only demotivates them, it teaches them that no effort is the better option, as working hard is, well, hard. And if there is no way that hard work will matter, then why struggle at all? The second option, teaching them that the sky is the limit if one has the will, teaches them that they have to make their own chances. That hard work will take you exactly as far as you choose to the limit you're willing to sacrifice to acheive. This is far more empowering in my opinion.
Which do you teach your children? The fact that you own your own business (not the easy or safe route) applying a skill that wasn't easy to come by (many years of refinement of abilities) should answer the question, but I would like to hear the words you use to tell them what you believe on the subject (if you don't mind sharing).
how did my name get brought up into this convo? lol You make it sound easy to get out of poverty... what you don't get is that these people are climbing a steep mountain to do so... much like small businesses... I would say 90% of them will fail... It's not for a lack of trying it is just life... certain circumstances whatever they may be pulls them backwards and not forwards... so if those 90% fail to get out of poverty then who helps them at least to have basic living needs like food, shelter, clothing etc.? Yes us whomever we may be but especially you so called Christians who are suppose to follow such things according to your Bible and such... I have a manager at my job who is Muslim and he fasted for 30 days for whatever holiday etc... the month of September and though I'm no fan of that religion or any religion for that matter... the reason they fast that long is so they know what it feels like to be poor and hungry... therefor they are more giving to the poor... I have more respect for them in that regards then Christianity who pretends to care... and I mention Christianity because the majority of politicians are WASP or some sort of Christians especially the GOP....
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
"So what do we; you, I and the other parents on this board, teach our children? I only see two options (as it realates to the current discussion). One, we teach as Bdgee claims to believe that if you aren't born 'rich' you can't ever become such."
Ok, here we have a direct example of what your problem is.
You ONLY see two options, among many many available......and one of them, is a total and idiotic fabrication.
NOWHERE did I ever say, or even provide anything from which top possibly infer, that I believed that "if you aren't born 'rich' you can't ever become such", as you declare.
You often declare. You concoct, out of nothing but bloated ego, some asinine opinion and declare it as an axiom of society, usually tacking on at least a few slurs and insulting descriptions of poor people to further feed that ego and, then, declare your concoction to be non-questionable.
Perhaps you are just too simple to know that you are doing it or perhaps, as is my conclusion, you are so conceited that you imagine yourself to be of greatly superior intellect and imagine we are not bright enough to unravel the twist of your convoluted mind.
IP: Logged |
quote:You often declare. You concoct, out of nothing but bloated ego, some asinine opinion and declare it as an axiom of society, usually tacking on at least a few slurs and insulting descriptions of poor people to further feed that ego and, then, declare your concoction to be non-questionable.
Perhaps you are just too simple to know that you are doing it or perhaps, as is my conclusion, you are so conceited that you imagine yourself to be of greatly superior intellect and imagine we are not bright enough to unravel the twist of your convoluted mind.
...and the Nobel Prize for Gibberish goes to....Bdgee!!!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: do you know how to make a budget? try out a basic budget for 4 on 40K$... it doesn't work.
The problem with a figure like that is that it doesn't take into consideration cost of living differences which exist between different states. I don't make too much more than that and I support my family of four just fine. That same wage in Cali probably would have you in a bread line. It's all regional.
My question still stands to any who would care to take it up. What do you teach your children? Hard/smart work pays off, or whatever 'caste' you're born into determines your financial fate?
Ok, lets see,
40K$ is 3,333 per month.
so (1/3) 1,111$ can almost get you a mortgage on a 150K$ home but you'll still have other expenses to maintain it..
600$ per month will get you two POS cars and insurance and gasoline.
750$ per month will allow you 25$ per day for food for the whole family... that leaves you with 883$ per month before anything else...
guess what? a good health insurance policy costs 1000$ per month.... (mcain wants to give you a tax credit for 250 per month, but he'll take away the tax break from the employers)
now we didn't even get into other needs like phone, electric nat gas, or clothing...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not even sure what you're point is with that break down, Glass. I'm telling you I already do live on that amount quite comforatably.
As to your listed items, the $1100 is about right on the mortgage. For the vehicles, I have a 94 Saturn and a 03 Durango, both paid for. Maintainence done by myself on both. The food budget is a little high as well, we run about $100 a week for the four of us. Insurance costs about $200 a month through work. That leaves quite a bit to work with for other expenses as well as some wants.
But once again, it's based on the premise that avoidable debt is shunned. There is no Sears card, none of the expensive toys that add monthly payments to own\utilize. Do we purchase things that are strictly wants? Of course. We simply save up till we can buy it outright. The money is earning interest (pitiful though it may be) instead of costing interest on a credit card. Interest on debt is what hurts on most purchases far more than the actual price.
Going back to my question though, what do you teach your children about hard work and opportunity? 'Caste' or 'Chance'?
IP: Logged |
"The problem with a figure like that is that it doesn't take into consideration cost of living differences which exist between different states. I don't make too much more than that and I support my family of four just fine. That same wage in Cali probably would have you in a bread line. It's all regional."
"I'm not even sure what you're point is with that break down, Glass. I'm telling you I already do live on that amount quite comforatably."
_________________________________________________
Your first point was a good one. There are a few companies that do allow for a wage differance depending on what region you live in although not to many.
The second point works for you now but it would not take much to put you and your family in the streets, a real scarey thought for anyone.
We need a better distribution of income in these companies which will not be an easy task considering to many companies have their hands in the politicians pockets and visa versa.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
... they are a one time cost of $500 to 1000$ not an investment.. most of 'em in your neighborhood were prolly stolen or rented to own at Aarons anyway..
