including, for example, whether an individual has a psychiatric disability as defined by the ADA and whether an employer may ask about an individual's psychiatric disability. People with psychiatric disabilities and employers have posed numerous questions to EEOC about this topic.³ There is a continual need for information and guidance because of the complexity of psychiatric disabilities and the general lack of knowledge (by the public) about these conditions. ⁴

One of the critical functions of EEOC is to provide enforcement guidance. This guidance is designed to:⁶

* facilitate the full enforcement of the ADA with respect to individuals alleging employment discrimination based on a psychiatric disability;

* respond to questions and concerns expressed by individuals with psychiatric disabilities regarding the ADA;

* answer questions posed by employers about how principles of ADA analysis apply in the context of psychiatric disabilities.

Emotional and psychiatric claims are now the leading reasons why people sue employers for on-the-job discrimination. Depressive disorders top the list of psychiatric disorders for mental health claims. In 1992, EEOC recorded 91 complaints based on emotional or psychiatric issues, 9% of the total. By 1997, the number had jumped to 2,789, representing more than 15% of the total, outnumbering claims based on AIDS, cancer, drug abuse, and back problems.⁷

*The Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that EEOC enforce anti-discrimination laws. EEOC enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act and the equal pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. EEOC is composed of five individuals (no more than three from one political party) with the chair and vice-chair appointed by the U.S. President.

Impact of EEOC rulings on mental health claims for depressive disorders

In the past, EEOC had ruled that plaintiffs could claim discrimination on the basis of a disability only if it affected their job performance. People who responded to antidepressants had their suits thrown out because when they responded to their medication, they no longer suffered job impairment and were not considered disabled.

Recently, EEOC changed its guidelines. Now mental health problems can be considered disabilities even if they do not hurt job performance. Under these new guidelines, companies must take requests for workplace accommodations based on mental health issues much more seriously.⁸

EEOC Case Example: Wood v. County of Alameda (N.D.California, 1995)
The court ruled on behalf of a plaintiff with anxiety and depression, ordering the county government to reassign the plaintiff to any vacant position for which she was qualified. Ms. Wood had previously received temporary disability benefits and was cleared to return to work, but not to her old job. She asked for the reasonable accommodation of reassignment to a vacant position, but the county claimed that it only assigned individuals to vacant positions in limited circumstances. The court found, however, that in fact the county government routinely reassigned employees and held that it discriminated against Ms. Wood by failing to make this option available to her.⁹