[VRWCTexan]

From the article:

"Each deaf person has to be assessed individually to make a determination, just like a hearing person, as to whether they can safely drive a UPS truck," he added. "That's all we ever asked."

The dispute centered on UPS's custom of denying hearing-impaired workers jobs operating delivery trucks weighing under 10,000 pounds. - end quote

Indeed I have a hearing disability (no two are exactly alike) and mine is helped with a hearing aid -

Flame away at lawyers, etc however IMO if they are making a blanket rule to not even test out a prospective driver - under the Americans with disabilities Act they may well have a valid case of overt corporate discrimination?

[the invisib1e hand]

ohhhpuuuuuleeeeze!

why don't you go try to get a job as a pilot with your hearing loss? because no one would hire you, that's why.

I'd never hire someone who's hearing wasn't very nearly perfect to drive my trucks (if I had any). Far too much liability: you cannot FORCE someone to take on liability. Not in a fair world, at least.

[Ouderkirk]

I don't think UPS is ignoring the distinction between hearing impaired and deaf.

More to the point is what is the opinion of the insurance underwriter and what exactly do actuarial tables show with respect to deaf vs. hearing impaired vs. hearing impaired w/assistance vs. no hearing impairment. The court has no responsibility to an under-capitalized business, eh?

[GladesGuru]

The real problem is in the well meaning but damaging Americans With Disabilities Act. Like OSHA, good intnetions organized into a bureacracy always result in negative unintended consequences.