In a legal filing last week, Cabela’s retail chain said a former employee who is transgender didn’t require any workplace accommodations because she wasn’t disabled.
Cabela’s is headquartered in Nebraska and specializes in outdoor recreation merchandise.
Between September 2006 and March 2007, Kate Lynn Blatt worked as a seasonal stocker at Cabela’s outlet in Hamburg, Pa. Blatt alleges extensive anti-LGBT workplace bias at Cabela’s, and says when she complained about it, she was fired.
Blatt filed suit against Cabela’s in August, seeking more than $150,000 in damages.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey L. Schmehl is assigned to the case, and a jury trial has been requested.
Blatt, 33, says she suffered from gender-identity disorder while working at Cabela’s.
Cabela’s allegedly banned her from a female restroom, thus denying her a reasonable accommodation for her disability, she said. A manager allegedly expressed concern that Blatt would rape another female if she used a female restroom.
In an Oct. 22 legal filing, Cabela’s contended that gender-identity disorder doesn’t constitute a disability under federal or state law.
“[Blatt] is not disabled within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act,” Cabela’s motion states. “As a result, Cabela’s did not have any duty to accommodate [Blatt]. Accordingly, [Blatt’s] claim for failure to accommodate under [federal and state law] should be dismissed.”
The federal Americans with Disabilities Act specifically excludes gender-identity disorder as a disability meriting workplace accommodations.
But Shannon Powers of the sate Human Relations Commission said the state’s Human Relations Act doesn’t specifically exclude gender-identity disorder as a disability.
“Whether gender-identity disorder can constitute a disability must be determined on a case-by-case basis,” Powers told PGN. “Gender-identity disorder wasn’t specifically excluded under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, as it was under the [federal] Americans with Disabilities Act. Also, the Pennsylvania General Assembly didn’t intend to exclude gender-identity disorder from coverage. That is the position of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission.”
Powers said the state’s definition of a disability is “very broad.”
“Not all conditions constitute disability under the definition of the Act,” she said. “The condition must substantially limit one or more major life activities to constitute a disability under the Act. Or the person must have a history of having a disability — or be regarded as having a disability — to be considered disabled under the Act.”
Powers said major life activities would include seeing, hearing, bending, walking, standing, pivoting, lifting, caring for oneself and being able to use a restroom.
“That’s not an exhaustive list,” she added
Earlier this year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that Cabela’s failed to reasonably accommodate Blatt’s disability by not allowing her to use a female restroom.
At presstime, Schmehl hadn’t ruled on Cabela’s request to dismiss Blatt’s disability-discrimination claim.
Blatt’s lawsuit also contains a sex-discrimination claim, but Cabela’s didn’t respond to that claim in its Oct. 22 motion.
Both sides declined to comment for this story.