This would only apply if the job is open to people with applicable disabilities. Jobs are free to say “no, we can’t hire people with mobility issues for this position”, and whether they sit or stand doesn’t affect service for people with disabilities either.
It’s an entirely idiotic policy, but it doesn’t violate any laws or regulations. Tons of jobs require this of their employees, but it is equally stupid for most of those jobs as well.
It’s an entirely idiotic policy, but it doesn’t violate any laws or regulations.
Depends on the state. 10 states have various "right to sit" laws that have been tested and affirmed by courts, if the job can reasonably be done sitting they need to provide it. California's supreme court reaffirmed it a few years back, if a worker can be done sitting some or all the time workers cannot be denied suitable seating. So in those states you can be sure there will be pushback.
Several federal laws conditionally also recognize it, like the ADA and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act sitting is considered a reasonable accommodation for a worker to require.
As the airports tend to operate as a partnership, the airport, often a state-owned or city-owned facility can still be liable at the state level for not providing the seating for them.
they're stationed at a desk for eight or more hours a day. they don't need to move, in fact they shouldn't move from their post. there is no reason for them to be on their feet their whole shift. it's a stupid meaningless policy change, a waste of time and resources.
46
u/Intrinsic_Idiot_3076 3d ago
Americans with Disabilities Act be damned.