Cross Dominance

[Coyote_Bandit]

Being left eyed and right handed or vice versa.

Where can I find out if this is considered a disability?

I'm interested in learning whether an adult with this condition (and partially sighted in the non dominant eye) in a technical/trade school in a program focusing on the development of fine motor skills has legal basis to obtain additional time (or suspension of time limitations) for completion of assigned tasks.

Thanks in advance for any resources you might be able to point me toward.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

1. Call your Congressman,

find out what Department - probably HHS, but maybe Education - handles matters like this. The social workers are usually very good with this sort of thing.

Good luck.................

[Coyote_Bandit]

4. Ummmm......

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately, I live in red state hell and the general attitude here is that the real world should not and for the most part does not make accomodations for the disabled. I actually know of tutors here who have told kids with documented learning disabilities to buckle down and try harder and not to ask for or expect any accomodations in the classroom because nobody will cut them any slack in the real working world.

Somehow I don't think my CongressCritters (which include Inhoff and Coburn) will be of much assistance.

[spin]

2. I do know that it can interfere with shooting a rife...

but not a handgun.

[Coyote_Bandit]

3. That depends on how one sights the handgun

A competitive shooter that shoots with a dominant hand and uses a non-dominant partially sighted eye to sight is going to be lucky to hit the broad side of a barn as they say. They can learn to shoot with their non-dominant hand however.

In any event, I'm concerned about a technical/trade educational program - not with sighting and shooting a gun. Lots of those programs require the ability to accurately sight and coordinate motor skills (sawing for instance). Also, cross dominance with a weaker partially sighted eye means the person has poor depth perception. These are the kinds of things that people can learn to compensate for but doing do generally requires additional time as compared to non-disabled students.

[spin]

5. Color blindness is often a disqualifier for an electronic technician...

Federal Aviation Jobs

Federal Aviation Career Overview
Federal Government - FAA Electronics Technician Federal Aviation

***snip***

In addition, the applicants must show an ability to work without supervision and to write reports. They must be able to pass a physical examination and be free from color blindness. A technician may, in connection with the performance of regular duties, be required to drive a Government-owned automobile or truck. emphasis mine
http://www.avjobs.com/careers/detail.asp?RecID=111

and is a disability.

Color blindness is sometimes classed as a disability; in certain situations, however, color blind people have an advantage over people with normal color vision. There are some studies which conclude that color blind individuals are better at penetrating certain camouflages.
http://www.avjobs.com/careers/detail.asp?RecID=111

[happyslug]

7. But wires are Color Coded for safety, and thus a legal reason for discrimination

Remember for purposes of the Americans With Disability Act (ADA) it is a defense that a person can NOT do a job. People with uncontrolled epilepsy, for example, can NOT be truck drivers (No reasonable accommodation exist to permit them to drive during a fit, please note if the epilepsy is "controllable" that is a different situation and all that is needed is accommodations for what is needed to "control" the disability).

Since Electrical wires are Color Coded for safety, a person who can NOT see the differences in color can NOT be an electrician. I have a sister who constantly failed the Color Blind test, do to poor eyesight NOT colorblindness, every time she "fails" the dot test she has to ask and be given the yarn test, which she passes, the Dot Test, which I have NEVER failed, has inherent errors in it, the lighting must be within a set standard (rarely is) the distance from the viewer must be a set distance (Rarely is) and thus the dot test is noted for false positives when it comes to color blindness. Every time my sister failed the test in the US Navy, their threaten to take away her electrician license. She then demands the yarn test and after a lot of saying it can be done, the Navy always did it (For the simple reason the Dot test is well known for its false positives). She passes the yarn test and that is that till she has to take another dot test. Yes, an accommodation would be to permit the use of the yarn test instead of the DOT test for people who fails the DOT test.

My point is as long as the employer has a good reason to show the person can NOT do the job then the employer can NOT be forced to hire someone.

Now, since the ADA was passed in 1991 an employee no longer have to tell a prospective employer of ANY disability including epilepsy and color blindness UNTIL the Employer makes a "firm offer" of employment (in some cases this is just sending the employee for a Physical, which also can NOT be done until a "firm offer" of employment has been made i.e. no one tells the employee that the employer has made a "firm offer" the employee is told to go to the Doctor). The employer can only ask for what an employees restrictions are (Except as to starting date etc) AFTER the employee has been made a "firm offer" of employment. At that point the employee MUST tell the employer of what ever restrictions his or her disability makes on the employee. If the employer then withdraws the offer of employment the burden is on the Employer to show that any accommodations would be unreasonable or some other good reason that justifies the withdraw of the offer of employment. This rarely happens for most employees do NOT apply for jobs they do NOT think they can do, but the switch in the burden of proof from employee to employer was part of the ADA. The reason for this switch was that disabled people had found out that employers would NOT hire them if told of their disability even if the disabled could do the job. The ADA thus addressed this problem by NOT requiring an employee to list disabilities or even to ask about accommodations, but delayed having the employee tell the employer of any restrictions till AFTER a firm job offer had been made.

[happyslug]

6. Anything can be a "Disability", the key is for what and how.

For example, for Social Security purposes anything that affects your day to day living activities is a "Severe Disability" to get by Step 2 of the Five Step Sequential evaluation process that SSA puts everyone through when they apply for Social Security Disability or SSI.

Does the cross dominance affect your day to day living activities? Your handwriting will be poor and your ability to do fine work would be restricted, but that does NOT prevent you from doing other day to day activities i.e. walk, eat, drink and even use tools. Thus I doubt a cross eye dominance will get pass step two of the Five Step Social Security Evaluation process (Unless it is more severe then my own cross dominance).

Now, if you can get pass Step Two of the Five Step Evaluation process, you get to step 3, "does the claimant have a disability in the "listings"?". The only thing doing with eyes in the listing of impairments is blindness and unless you are 20/200 in your better eye you can NOT win at Step 3 of the Five Step evaluation process.

Step 4 is "Can you return to the TYPE of work you have done in the last 15 years?" If yes, then you are NOT disabled, if you you go to Step 5.

Step Five is simple, are there jobs that exists in the National Economy a person with your disability can perform? Generally a Vocational Expert testifies what jobs a person with the restrictions of the Claimant can and can not do. Remember the issue is NOT if you have a disability, but do jobs exist that a person with that disability can perform? Typical Light and Sedentary jobs include the following:
1. Guard (i.e. an unarmed security guard)
2. Surveillance System Monitor (a person that watch the Videos from all the Camera at a sight with video surveillance).
3. Small parts tester, generally in the electronic industry where you put a testing device on a part and see if the light indicate it is good or not. If good back on the assembly line, if bad thrown out.
4. Small parts bagger, someone who puts all those nuts and bolts and other parts in a bag to be used later by someone else to assemble something.
5. Small Parts Assembler, Someone who assembles parts together.
6. Day time Janitor (The person you see in Malls pushing a dust mop around during hours the mall is open, such light janitorial jobs is in other areas but it is just to keep dirt and dust down and as such is a "light job". The heavy duty cleaning with mops, buffers etc is referred to a "Medium duty Janitor" a different classification then "Light Duty Janitor" and must be excluded if we are just looking at Sedentary and light work. Please note I do NOT see Cross dominance affecting your ability to do Medium and Heavy work but I am keeping this restricted to Light and Sedentary work.

Thus, for purposes of SS, cross dominance will NOT be a disability for purposes of SS disability.

On the other hand, Cross dominance IS a disability in a Education assistance in Grade School and High School. In such situation all that needs to be shown is that the Cross dominance will affect your ability to do school work. Cross Dominance will affect your ability to throw a ball, write, and do other activities requiring fine dexterity. I do not know what assistance can be provided (Exceptions would be training is using the non-dominate hand to better match up with the dominate eye, permitting the use of thinner pencils in drawing classes, providing more training when it comes to throwing balls etc).

As far as the EEOC is concern, it is more in the middle between these two, if you are terminated because you can NOT do the work and no accommodations can be made so you can do the work then it is legal to terminate you. If on the other hand, reasonable accommodations is all that is needed to help you to do the job then such accommodations MUST be made. The issue becomes what is a "Reasonable" Accommodation? That is a Jury Decision. I like to cite the case of the Pro-Golfer who sure the PGA for NOT permitting him to use a Golf Cart (One of the requirements of the PGA is that each golfer MUST walk the course and Carry his clubs). This was the defense the PGA used in the court case, that is was a REQUIREMENT of being a Pro Golfer to walk the Course and carry the clubs. The Jury did NOT buy the argument. The Jury said such walking and carrying was NOT an essential part of the Job and awarded the disabled golfer Judgment and a ruling that the PGA must permit him to ride in a Golf Cart.

Notice the key is the above Three Situation, each is dependent on its definition of what the law is, thus a person may be disabled for Educational purposes, NOT for Social Security purposes and yet be discriminated against because of the disability (and thus under EEOC rules). A person my be disabled for Social Security but NOT disabled for EEOC if there are no jobs such a person could do (Through eligible for Educational assistance if still in Grade School or High School).