Opinion
Civil Action No. 97-12102-GAO
August 7, 2002
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT
I. Introduction
John Sprague brought this action against United Airlines, Inc. ("United") under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. ("ADA"), claiming that United discriminated against him by withdrawing an offer of employment as a line mechanic because of purported safety concerns about Sprague's deafness. Sprague seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages.
The case was tried to the Court sitting without a jury. Based upon my evaluation of the testimony and other evidence presented at trial, I make the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth below. My fundamental conclusions are summarized as follows:
1. The ADA prohibits employers from taking adverse actions against qualified applicants for employment because of a disability.
2. Sprague can perform all the essential functions of the job of line mechanic with or without reasonable accommodation.
3. United found Sprague qualified for a position as a line mechanic at Logan Airport and offered him a job, but then rescinded the offer because of Sprague's hearing disability. United violated the ADA in rescinding its job offer to Sprague and in failing to hire Sprague as a line mechanic at Logan Airport.
4. As a remedy, I order United to offer a line mechanic job at Logan Airport to Sprague with full seniority and benefits retroactive to April 21, 1997, the date he would have begun work had United not unlawfully rescinded the offer. United is also ordered to pay compensatory damages for Sprague's lost earnings and for his emotional distress, as well as punitive damages.
II. Applicable Legal Principles
To prevail on an ADA claim, an individual must establish (1) that he is a person with a disability, (2) that he was qualified for the position he sought, and (3) that he was subjected to an adverse employment action because of his disability. See Ward v. Mass. Health Research Inst., Inc., 209 F.3d 29, 33 (1st Cir. 2000); Laurin v. Providence Hosp., 150 F.3d 52, 56 (1st Cir. 1998). The parties do not dispute that Sprague is disabled and that United refused to employ him as a line mechanic because of his disability. The principal issue presented is whether Sprague was a "qualified individual" for purposes of the ADA.
An individual with a disability is "qualified" within the meaning of the ADA if he satisfies the requisite skill, experience, education and other job-related requirements of the employment position, and with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8); 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(m). See also Ward, 209 F.3d at 33. The parties do not dispute that Sprague possesses the skill, experience, and education required for the line mechanic position, but they do dispute whether Sprague can perform the essential functions of the position, with or without reasonable accommodation.
A. Essential Functions
While the plaintiff bears the ultimate burden of proof on the issue of whether he can perform the essential functions of the job, the defendant, who has better access to the relevant evidence, bears the burden of proving that any given job function is essential. Ward, 209 F.3d at 35; Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 62 F.3d 1108, 1113 (8th Cir. 1995). The ADA regulations "describe `essential job functions' somewhat tautologically as `fundamental job duties,' exclusive of `the marginal functions of the position.'" Gillen v. Fallon Ambulance Serv., Inc., 283 F.3d 11, 25 (1st Cir. 2002) (quoting 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(n)(1)). The regulations advise that a particular job function may be considered essential for any of several reasons, including but not limited to the following:
(i) The function may be essential because the reason the position exists is to perform that function;
(ii) The function may be essential because of the limited number of employees available among whom the performance of that job function can be distributed; and/or
(iii) The function may be highly specialized so that the incumbent in the position is hired for his or her expertise or ability to perform the particular function. (3) Evidence of whether a particular function is essential includes, but is not limited to:
(i) The employer's judgment as to which functions are essential;
(ii) Written job descriptions prepared before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job;
(iii) The amount of time spent on the job performing the function; (iv) The consequences of not requiring the incumbent to perform the function;
(v) The terms of a collective bargaining agreement;
(vi) The work experience of past incumbents in the job; and/or
(vii) The current work experience of incumbents in similar jobs.29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(n)(2)-(3); see also Laurin, 150 F.3d at 57.
The task of identifying essential functions "involves fact-sensitive considerations and must be determined on a case-by-case basis." Gillen, 283 F.3d at 25. In the absence of evidence of discriminatory animus by the employer, a court generally will give "substantial weight to the employer's view of job requirements." Ward, 209 F.3d at 34 (citing Laurin, 150 F.3d at 57-61 and EEOC v. Amego, Inc., 110 F.3d 135, 144-45 (1st Cir. 1997)). However, the employer's good faith judgment as to what job functions are essential is not dispositive when other factors do not support that judgment. Gillen, 283 F.3d at 25. Indeed, the employer's judgment does not automatically control even when made in good faith. See Garcia-Ayala v. Lederle Parenterals, Inc., 212 F.3d 638, 649 (1st Cir. 2000); Ward, 209 F.3d at 34. Courts take into consideration factors other than the employer's determination of the essential functions of the job not "to second-guess legitimate business judgments, but, rather, to ensure that an employer's asserted requirements are solidly anchored in the realities of the workplace, not constructed out of whole cloth." Gillen, 283 F.3d at 25.
B. Reasonable Accommodation
Once a court determines the essential functions of a position, the inquiry turns to whether the plaintiff can perform those functions, and if not, whether some reasonable accommodation would allow him to perform them. See Gillen, 283 F.3d at 25; Ward, 209 F.3d at 36; 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(1)(ii). The ADA includes in its definition of "reasonable accommodation" the following examples: "job restructuring," "modified work schedules," and "acquisition or modification of equipment or devices." 42 U.S.C. § 12111(9)(B). If the plaintiff demonstrates the availability of a reasonable accommodation that would allow him to perform the essential job functions, the burden shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that such an accommodation would constitute an undue hardship to the employer. Ward, 209 F.3d at 36. The plaintiff's burden requires him "to show not only that the proposed accommodation would enable [him] to perform the essential functions of [his] job, but also that, at least on the face of things, it is feasible for the employer under the circumstances." Reed v. LePage Bakeries, Inc., 244 F.3d 254, 259 (1st Cir. 2001). If the plaintiff meets this burden, "the defendant then has the opportunity to show that the proposed accommodation is not as feasible as it appears but rather that there are further costs to be considered, certain devils in the details." Id. This reconciliation of the phrases "reasonable accommodation" and "undue hardship" and their corresponding burdens has recently been affirmed by the Supreme Court. See U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, ___ U.S. ___, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 1523 (2002).
In determining whether accommodations could be made to enable the plaintiff to perform the essential functions of a particular job, the employer and the employee may engage in a flexible, interactive process to explore the availability and utility of possible accommodations. See 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(3). The failure to engage in such a process is not necessarily a violation of the ADA.
However, "there may be situations in which failure to engage in the process would constitute a failure to provide reasonable accommodation that amounts to a violation of the ADA." See Kvorjak v. State of Maine, 259 F.3d 48, 52-53 (1st Cir. 2001) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Regardless of whether or not an employer's failure to engage in this interactive process is a violation of the ADA, it may be strong evidence of the employer's bad faith. See Smith v. Midland Brake, Inc., 180 F.3d 1154, 1172 (10th Cir. 1999); Bultemeyer v. Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs., 100 F.3d 1281, 1285 (7th Cir. 1996); Beck v. Univ. of Wisc. Bd. of Regents, 75 F.3d 1130, 1135-36 (7th Cir. 1996); see also Criado v. IBM Corp., 145 F.3d 437, 444 (1st Cir. 1998); Jacques v. Clean-Up Group, Inc., 96 F.3d 506, 514 (1st Cir. 1996).
III. Findings of Fact A. The Parties
1. United is an international air carrier which employs aircraft mechanics to work both at airports and at its Maintenance Operations Centers ("MOCs"). At airports such as Boston's Logan International Airport ("Logan"), United mechanics receive and dispatch aircraft, tow aircraft to gates, hangars, and remote airport parking locations, and conduct various inspections and service on aircraft. Mechanics performing such duties at airports are frequently referred to as "line mechanics." United's MOCs are located at Indianapolis, Indiana, and San Francisco, California. Mechanics working at MOCs are often referred to as "shop mechanics." United's mechanics are represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers ("IAM").
2. John Sprague resides in Grafton, Massachusetts, with his wife and two daughters. He has been profoundly deaf since birth. He communicates by means of speech, lipreading, American Sign Language, gestures, and writing. Sprague attended the Boston School for the Deaf from the age of 4 until he was 15 or 16. He then attended "mainstream" programs through junior and senior high school. After graduating from high school, he attended Gallaudet University in Washington D.C. for a year and a half. He then enrolled in the Wentworth Institute in Boston. He has training and employment experience as an airline mechanic. He is a licensed airplane pilot.
B. Sprague's Hearing Disability
3. Sprague is profoundly hearing impaired. Even with hearing aids, he cannot hear sounds at frequencies above somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 hertz regardless of volume. Hearing sounds above those frequencies is critical to distinguishing speech. Both Sprague and an expert witness on his behalf, Dr. Edward Reardon, confirmed that Sprague cannot understand the spoken word at any volume. Nor can he speak with sufficient clarity to be understood by radio or intercom. However, using hearing aids, Sprague can hear speech, including the number of syllables spoken, although he is not able to distinguish particular words.
4. Sprague used hearing aids as a child until his mid-teenage years, but then discontinued using them. He began using an analog hearing aid again in August 1998 when he was employed by United at its MOC in San Francisco. In early 2000, Sprague acquired a digital hearing aid that was more advanced than his previous aids and improved his hearing further. Shortly after this purchase, Sprague bought a second digital hearing aid to enhance his ability to hear sounds around him and to localize the source of the sounds. Digital hearing aids have been available since the early 1990s, well before Sprague applied for the job at United.
5. Sprague has also learned to compensate for his hearing loss by being visually sensitive to his surroundings and by being sensitive to vibrations in his environment. According to Dr. Reardon, deaf persons often have a heightened ability to use their other senses to compensate for their diminished capacity to hear.
C. Sprague's Communication Skills
6. Sprague is able to communicate face-to-face with others by speaking, reading lips, and occasionally writing notes and gesturing. He was taught to speak and to read lips at the Boston School for the Deaf, an oral school for deaf children where he was not permitted to use sign language. All the witnesses who had worked with Sprague testified that they had virtually no difficulty in communicating with him using speech, gestures, or occasional notes. Sprague's supervisors at the Taunton Airport, Michael Dupont and Jim LaBrecque, testified that they did not have any difficulty in communicating with him and that he communicated easily with co-workers and customers. They received no complaints about Sprague's communication skills. Sprague's communication skills were further confirmed by letters of recommendation provided to United after it withdrew the Logan line mechanic job offer. For example, the manager of the Mansfield Municipal Airport stated that "One of [Sprague's] greatest attributes . . . is his ability to communicate with people. He is exceptional at lip reading and speaking. Watching him with his co-workers over the years . . . indicates how adaptable he is."
D. Sprague's career in aviation
7. During his first year at Gallaudet, Sprague met a deaf classmate who was a pilot. His classmate took him flying, and Sprague realized that it was possible for a deaf person to become a pilot. Sprague had been interested in aviation since he was a child, and he decided to pursue a career in aviation. He left Gallaudet after the first semester of his second year because the school did not offer the opportunity for him to major in an aviation-related field. After Gallaudet, Sprague enrolled at Wentworth Institute in Boston, where he successfully completed a program in aircraft mechanic technology in 1986.
8. While he was still at Wentworth, Sprague took flying lessons from King Aviation at the Taunton Airport. In exchange for the lessons, he worked at the airport as a "line boy," refueling aircraft, helping mechanics, and performing odd jobs around the airfield.
9. Sprague is a licensed pilot and flew planes on a regular basis in the course of his work in general aviation. Witnesses testified that Sprague is an excellent pilot.
General aviation refers to all aviation except for military and major airline aviation.
10. Sprague holds an Airframe and Powerplant ("A P") license and an Inspection Authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"). The Inspection Authorization allows him to perform major repairs and supervise other mechanics working on general aviation planes. Most aviation mechanics do not have an Inspection Authorization. Sprague has also received a number of awards relating to aviation, including two awards from the FAA for overcoming barriers in aviation.
11. After graduating from Wentworth, Sprague worked full time at the Taunton Airport as an A P mechanic from June 1986 until September 1995. For most of that time, he worked at King Aviation, which conducted a flight school. The work environment was very active, with many training aircraft and a great deal of traffic. Sprague had no difficulty working in that busy environment. During the course of his employment there, he performed inspections, repairs, modifications, and alterations of general aviation aircraft.
12. Sprague's supervisors at the Taunton Airport testified that he was an excellent mechanic who performed his duties well and efficiently, sometimes under rigorous time constraints. He was conscientious and focused on his work. His duties required communication with other mechanics, which he accomplished without difficulty. He was able to check audible warnings on planes, to diagnose problems that required the ability to detect sound, and to tell whether an engine was running rough or skipping. On at least one occasion, he found a problem in a control system by detecting a squeaking noise.
13. Sprague left King Aviation in September 1995 because the company was closing. From September 1995 until March 1997, Sprague stayed at home with his children and performed temporary carpentry and landscaping work. In March 1997, he was hired by his former boss at King Aviation, Mike Dupont, to work as a mechanic at American Aero Services, a new company Dupont had started. Sprague worked for American Aero Services until February 1998 when he accepted a job with United in the engine shop at United's San Francisco MOC.
E. United's Job Offer and its Subsequent Withdrawal
14. In 1995, Sprague decided to seek employment as a line mechanic with a major airline and sent an application to United. In January 1996, he telephoned Robert Barnes, United's Manager of Maintenance Operations at Logan Airport, and asked about possible employment as a mechanic and the possibility of touring United's facility at Logan. Sprague was given a tour of the facility in February 1996. Following the tour, he received a call from Barnes, who stated that Sprague had impressed the maintenance employees at Logan and that he (Barnes) would talk to Lou Gusto, United's manager of mechanic employment, about Sprague.
Sprague can communicate by telephone by typing into a TTY machine and using relay operators who simultaneously convert text to voice and voice to text as a service provided by the phone company.
15. In July 1996, Jim Cruson, a representative from United's mechanic employment office in San Francisco, called Sprague and asked him to come to San Francisco to interview for a mechanic position in the MOC in San Francisco or Oakland. Sprague indicated that he was willing to relocate to either San Francisco or Oakland for a limited period as long as he was then able to bid on positions in Boston. In August 1996, Sprague traveled to San Francisco for the interview with Cruson. Following the interview he was sent for a medical examination at the JFK International Airport. In November 1996, Lou Gusto at United contacted Sprague and requested that Sprague return to San Francisco for a second interview and that Sprague attend the interview without an interpreter. On November 20, 1996, Sprague traveled to San Francisco and interviewed with Stu Simon, the team coordinator for aircraft mechanics in Oakland, without an interpreter. A few days after the second interview Gusto sent a letter to Sprague informing him that he had been accepted as a sheet metal mechanic and that he would be hired to fill the next available vacancy.
16. On April 8, 1997, Gusto called Sprague and offered him a job as a line mechanic at Logan Airport. Sprague accepted the offer immediately. Sprague subsequently received letters from United confirming the job offer. He was scheduled to begin work on April 21, 1997.
17. However, after Sprague was offered the job at Logan, a management official in San Francisco, Don Nielsen, United's general manager for line maintenance operations, learned of the job offer and called Barnes at Logan to express concern about the hiring of a deaf mechanic. Nielsen had no information about Sprague other than that he was deaf. In fact, Nielsen inaccurately believed that Sprague was unable to hear any sounds at all. Nielsen was not normally involved in hiring decisions for United's line mechanics. His intervention regarding Sprague was the only occasion on which Nielsen has been involved with such a decision.
18. Although Barnes claimed in his testimony that he himself made the decision to withdraw Sprague's job offer, it is clear that Nielsen's intervention is what caused the offer to be withdrawn. Barnes acknowledged that if he had not received a call from Nielsen, Sprague would have begun work for United at Logan as scheduled on April 21, 1997.
19. Three days before Sprague was scheduled to begin work for United at Logan Airport, he received a call from Gusto who notified him that United was withdrawing the job offer because of safety concerns. Gusto stated that the decision to rescind the Logan job offer had not been made by the Boston employees but by higher management. Gusto said that management was concerned about Sprague's ability to work safely in a busy airport environment.
20. Witnesses testified that Sprague was distraught after the job offer was withdrawn. His wife testified that her husband was upset, depressed, angry, and hurt following withdrawal of the job offer. She observed that he did not eat and withdrew from his family and friends. Sprague's boss, Mike Dupont, observed that he became withdrawn and silent.
21. Before making the decision to revoke the job offer, United did not investigate the possibility of whether any accommodations might alleviate its concerns about Sprague. No one at United spoke with Sprague, his doctors, or any reasonable accommodation specialists. Barnes claimed that, following a directive from Nielsen, he filled out a "reasonable accommodation procedure form" in order to determine whether Sprague really could do the job of a line mechanic at Logan. It appears, however, that this reasonable accommodation form was simply a way of justifying the revocation of Sprague's job offer, and not a bona fide effort to explore the possibility of a reasonable accommodation. I find that the form was completed after the decision to withdraw the offer had already been made.
22. Sprague attempted to initiate an interactive process with United by flying out to San Francisco to meet with Nielsen in an effort to convince him that he could do the job and that United should reinstate the job offer. In preparation for that meeting, Sprague sent letters of recommendation and support to Nielsen, through Gusto, that he had obtained from his co-workers, supervisors, FAA personnel, a former teacher, and family members. Sprague met with Nielsen in San Francisco on April 23, 1997. At the meeting, Sprague attempted to convince Nielsen that he could work safely at Logan Airport. He also suggested a number of possible accommodations that might assist him in performing the line mechanic job at Logan, or that might alleviate the concerns Gusto had told him United had expressed regarding safety. For example, he offered to obtain new hearing aids. He gave Nielsen pages from a catalogue showing devices that convert sound to vibrations and could assist him in detecting and distinguishing sounds in the workplace. He requested that United give him a trial work period at Logan, one week on the second shift and one on the third shift, before making a final decision about the job. Sprague also suggested that he be assigned work at Logan on the midnight shift when there was little activity at the airport. It is worth noting that the first six months of a mechanic's employment at United are a probationary period, and a mechanic whose work is unsatisfactory for any reason can be discharged without recourse to any grievance procedures otherwise available under the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
23. The day after his meeting with Nielsen, Sprague received a call from Gusto, who told him that Nielsen had not changed his mind and was still concerned about the same safety issues. Sprague attempted to contact Nielsen by telephone and letter, but Nielsen did not return his call or respond to his letter. In his letter, Sprague reiterated the suggestions he had made to Nielsen in person, including his offer to obtain new hearing aids.
F. Sprague's Employment in the United MOC in San Francisco
24. After revoking the Logan line mechanic job offer, United offered Sprague a job in the engine maintenance shop at its MOC in San Francisco. At first, Sprague did not accept the offer because his goal had always been to work in Boston as a line mechanic. He was not interested in accepting a job in San Francisco. United's revocation of the line mechanic offer and his meeting with Nielsen convinced him that, if he went to San Francisco, United would not let him transfer back to Boston as he would wish to do. However, in March 1998, Sprague reconsidered and accepted the job with United in the engine shop in San Francisco because he wanted to try to prove to United that he was a good mechanic. His family remained in Massachusetts, and he commuted home across the country every weekend to see them.
25. The work Sprague performed in the engine shop did not fully utilize his abilities and experience. This work involved inspecting a single part of a disassembled airplane engine. As the holder of an A P license, Sprague was overqualified for the shop mechanic's job. Not surprisingly, Sprague completed United's six-month probationary period in the engine shop with excellent performance reviews. Sprague worked in the engine shop in San Francisco for United until July 1999 when he accepted a job as line mechanic with AirTran Airlines ("AirTran") at Logan Airport.
G. Sprague's Employment at AirTran Airlines
26. Sprague applied for a job at AirTran as a line mechanic in early 1999. He was interviewed by Rick Pedra, Boston Maintenance Manager for AirTran. There was no interpreter present during the interview, and Pedra and Sprague communicated by speaking. During the interview, Pedra asked Sprague about his hearing impairment and whether it would affect his ability to work as a line mechanic at Logan. Sprague's answers satisfied Pedra, and he offered Sprague a position as a line mechanic for AirTran. Sprague began work for AirTran at Logan in July 1999. In March 2000, he transferred to Fort Lauderdale Airport, where, at the time of trial, he was working as a line mechanic on the midnight shift.
27. At AirTran Sprague underwent five weeks of formal training. During these training sessions, he did not have an interpreter but was able to comprehend what was being taught by reading the instructors' lips, looking at overhead slides, reading manuals, and having one of his classmates take notes for him. He passed all the tests given in the training session, scoring in the top 10% of his class. Sprague also received on the job training, including training on cockpit warning systems. He completed his probationary period at AirTran successfully.
28. In the course of his employment at AirTran, Sprague has performed the same duties as other line mechanics. AirTran has not excused him from any of these duties because of his disability. Specific duties performed by Sprague as a line mechanic at AirTran have included: speaking with the flight crews of arriving planes about mechanical problems; taxiing aircraft; towing aircraft; checking audible cockpit warnings and public address systems; doing walk-around inspection of planes as well as overnight service checks, "A" checks and "2-L" (lube) checks; doing two-mechanic operations checks of flight controls using hand signals; running aircraft engines at high power; doing engine leak checks using hand signals; repairing routine and non-routine maintenance items, including deferred maintenance items; performing repairs requiring communication between two mechanics, including replacing hydraulic pumps, replacing engine fire loops, and replacing stabilizer trim motors; and working alone on planes at a remote location. Sprague's supervisors at AirTran received no complaints about his performance or his ability to communicate. Witnesses familiar with his job performance at AirTran testified that he was considered an excellent mechanic.
H. The Job of Airline Maintenance Mechanic at United
29. The official United job description for the position of line mechanic reads as follows: Job Description and Duties:
Performs a variety of tasks generally recognized as mechanic's work involving the troubleshooting, servicing, repairing, overhauling and testing of aircraft engines, frames, parts, electrical systems and other components. Work assignments may involve specific tasks and skills associated with assignments at the hangar, ramp, backshop, or line operation or rotation through different work areas depending on location and service demands. Duties may involve the lifting and moving of parts, tools, and equipment up to 50 pounds; ability to read and interpret blue prints, diagrams, maintenance manuals, and other instructional materials; normal vision and manual dexterity to grasp and work with tools, parts, equipment; climbing and working from ladders and high platforms; sitting, bending, twisting and other positions in confined areas for continuous or extended periods. Environmental conditions may involve exposure to congestion; varying noise levels and temperature changes in working indoors/outdoors, moving aircraft and equipment, working with solvents, chemicals, oxygen, nitrogen or other hazardous materials.
* Job Functions: (Not intended to be all inclusive and subject to modifications)
* Inspects, cleans, overhauls, service repairs aircraft engines, parts and components.
* Identifies and uses resins, epoxy, fiberglass, adhesives or other fillers in repair or fabrication process.
* Uses hand and power tools to drill, weld, machine, plate, grind, sand, rivet, and paint in the repair or installation of parts and equipment.
* Uses scales, charts, and precision measuring instruments in conducting tests and operational checks.
* Operates computer terminals to access and manipulate maintenance information, order parts or maintain records.
* Operates motorized vehicles such as electric carts, jacklifts, and trucks.
* Receives and dispatches arriving/departing aircraft and may taxi or tow aircraft to or from hangars and terminals. Education: Tenth grade completion; high school graduate preferred. Must possess appropriate FAA or FCC licenses where required.
Experience: One year of experience in aircraft maintenance work. (Trial Ex. 217). It is particularly noteworthy that while the job description requires an applicant to have "normal vision" and physical dexterity, there is no requirement regarding "normal hearing."
30. United line mechanics working on the midnight shift at Logan spend the great majority of their time performing routine periodic maintenance checks of aircraft (including various detailed service checks and so-called "A" checks, which are more thorough than service checks), as well as performing non-routine maintenance as needed. There are different levels of urgency and priority to maintenance tasks. Some must be performed immediately before a plane will be cleared to fly; these items are referred to as "minimum equipment list" items. Other items can be "deferred" and performed at a later date.
31. For example, a United "job card" for an "A" check includes the following tasks:
Pre-check preparation (which includes ground preparations and cockpit preparations);
Pre-dispatch checks (which includes retract T/E flaps and L/E slats, remove gear down locks and door locks, reactivate thrust reversers, close cowlings, and read EICAS messages);
Aircraft exterior check (which includes exterior walk around, check upper and lower fuselage — STA. 159-1885, and drain main, surge and center fuel tank sumps);
External hydraulic leak check;
Overwater check (which includes cockpit, first class, aft cabin and life vest date check);
Landing gear service (which includes visual check — landing gear and wheelwells, check tires and wheels, service tire pressure — A.D. 87-08-09, check brake wear, clean shock struts and nose wheel spin brake check);
Passenger cabin — check and service (which includes cabin walk through, cabin maintenance forms/"NEEDS SERVICE" tags, portable oxygen bottle check, clean video monitors, video tape reproducer head cleaning, check emergency exit windows, clean zone temperature sensor filters, passenger seat table check and service);
Cabin and passenger doors — check and service (which includes visual check of entry/service doors, check door mounted escape cylinder pressure, check emergency power reservoir pressure, lube girt bar slide mechanism at passenger doors 1, 2, and 4, and girt bar mechanism check);
Galley check and service (which includes galley cleaning — sumps, coffeemaker probes and ovens, and clean air chiller filter (galley 1B and 4A));
Hydraulics check and service (which includes service hydraulic systems — L, R and CTR, and check hydraulic — DPI indicators);
Cargo compartment checks (which includes APU battery ground check, fwd and aft cargo compartment lining check, visual check of all cargo doors, fwd and aft cargo loading system switch check, aft cargo compartment blowout panels check, check LOB parts and storage container, service crew oxygen and cargo door winterization);
APU check and service (which includes check DPI indicators, service APU oil, APU leak check and APU operation performance report, APU start counter read, and APU close up);
Cockpit equipment check (which includes cockpit visual check, check printer paper, clean flight compartment, flight restraint system check, spare boom mic test, and check crew information forms);
Cockpit electrical checks (which includes EICAS message readout, pilot's master dim test check, emergency lighting check, wing and body anti-collision lights check, wing position lights check, off-wing slide squib/pressure switch check, standby power system check, voice recorder operational check using test switch, engine crossfeed valve check, HMG operational check and E/E cooling smoke/low flow detection check);
Left main gear and door lube;
Nose landing gear and door lube;
Left flap transmission ballscrew — lube;
Engine visual check (which includes inlet area check, pylon area check, exhaust area check, engine cowling check, external engine check and close engine cowling);
Engine check and service (which includes check magnetic chip detectors, engine oil service, IDG oil and filter replace, starter chip detector and oil change, cowl hold open rod check, close engine cowling and engine leak check);
Left wing/nacelle strut mid spar fitting check;
Engine visual check (which includes inlet area check, pylon area check, exhaust area check, engine cowling check and close engine cowling); and
Engine and IDG oil service (which includes replace main oil filter, engine oil service, IDG oil service and engine leak check).
(Trial Ex. 204).
32. The United service check job cards include such functions as:
Accomplish a general visual walkaround check of the airplane and look for obvious damage or irregularities;
Ensure engine oil level is at filler neck;
Brake wear with brake set and press up;
Check tire wear;
Check/service tire press;
Main/nose gear shock struts — check that strut extension appears normal (visual check) and wipe exposed piston chrome in downward direction with cloth soaked with oil;
Check exterior lights;
Check APU oil;
Hydraulic supply systems — service until indicator on reservoir reads half way between the refill and fill marks.
(Trial Ex. 203).
I. Sprague's Ability to Perform the Essential Functions of the Job
33. Sprague is able to perform the described functions of the job of line mechanic with only few and very minor exceptions, and he can perform all of the essential functions of the job with or without accommodation. I make this finding for the following reasons:
34. First, simple review of the job tasks as described by United in the official job description for the position of line mechanic and in the job cards for the principal maintenance projects reveals very few tasks that even utilize, let alone depend on, the faculty of hearing for their accomplishment. Of all the tasks listed in the previous paragraphs, there is only one obvious hearing-dependent task: "voice recorder operational check," as part of the "A" check.
35. Second, this impression was confirmed by the testimony of an expert witness for Sprague. Howard Fuller, who has worked for many years as a line mechanic and supervisor of mechanics for several airlines, including United, testified that he had examined in detail all the tasks United line mechanics perform in the course of both routine and non-routine maintenance work. In addition to reviewing the job description and the service check job cards, Fuller reviewed maintenance records from United's operations at Logan which detail the actual work done on aircraft during particular periods of time. (See Trial Ex. 300). He expressed the opinion that Sprague could perform at least 95% of the tasks listed on the United "A" check job cards. Since every "A" check is performed by a team of between five and nine mechanics, there would be no difficulty for a United supervisor to organize the team's work so that one or another of the other mechanics was assigned to do those few tasks that would require normal hearing. Similarly, Fuller testified that Sprague could perform all but one or two items listed on United's service check job cards and about 98% of the tasks shown to have actually been done on aircraft by the maintenance logs which Fuller had reviewed and which were in evidence.
36. Third, it is not necessary simply to try to assess in the abstract what tasks Sprague might be able to do because he has demonstrated the ability to perform the overwhelming majority of line mechanic functions in his work at AirTran. Mechanics familiar with Sprague's work at AirTran testified that Sprague has been able successfully and safely to perform the duties of line mechanic. While there may be some differences in procedures and equipment between airlines, the skills of a mechanic are transferrable, and a mechanic who works on DC-9s for AirTran will be able to work on Boeing 757s for United. Indeed, several of the mechanics who testified at trial had worked at various points in their careers for different airlines on different types of aircraft.
37. Finally, Sprague's work as a deaf line mechanic is not unique. There was evidence of two other deaf mechanics who have successfully and safely performed duties for other employers similar to those required to be done by United line mechanics.
J. United's Asserted Reasons for Rescinding the Job Offer
38. At the time Sprague's job offer was withdrawn, United asserted that it had safety concerns about having a deaf mechanic work in a noisy airport environment. Thereafter, United offered a variety of other reasons to justify its refusal to employ him as a line mechanic at Logan. United's shifting explanation of its reasons for withdrawing the job offer undermines United's credibility and suggests that the company simply did not want to employ a deaf line mechanic. The inference that United acted in bad faith is also supported by the undisputed fact that United refused to engage in any "interactive process" to explore potential accommodations for Sprague.
39. United's initial explanation for why it withdrew the job offer was that it would be unsafe for Sprague to work in a busy airport tarmac environment. The explanation evolved over time into a list of tasks that United claimed Sprague could not do. However, it is clear that United never made any attempt to ascertain whether Sprague could not actually perform these tasks. No United official consulted any doctors, audiologists, accommodations specialists, or former employers, co-workers, or teachers of Sprague to determine what Sprague was capable of doing as a line mechanic. No United official made any attempt to work with Sprague himself to determine whether he was capable of performing these various tasks with or without reasonable accommodation. The United officials involved in the withdrawal of the job offer, including Nielsen and Barnes, did not even consult with United's own line mechanics to help determine whether the tasks United claimed Sprague could not perform really would preclude him from performing the essential functions of the job, and neither ever spoke to or met Sprague before rescinding the job offer.
40. Moreover, as described in more detail below, I am satisfied that Sprague can perform most of the specific tasks United has raised as problematic, some with and some without accommodation, and he can therefore safely and effectively perform the job of a line mechanic for United at Logan Airport. Those few tasks that he cannot perform with an accommodation are not essential functions of the job. Although a good deal of time was spent at trial focusing on these specific job tasks, I find that the tasks described below comprise only a small proportion of the tasks performed by line mechanics.
1. Safety concerns due to Sprague's hearing impairment
41. United's initial explanation for withdrawing the Logan job offer was that it would not be safe for Sprague to work in a busy airport environment because of his hearing impairment. United was apparently concerned that Sprague would not be able to hear vehicles moving around him and might be struck by one, or that he would not be able to hear warning signals or other sounds indicating dangerous conditions, such as the operation of hydraulic pumps. However, I find that Sprague can work safely in a busy and noisy airport environment. He has worked safely around planes for more than fifteen years, including large commercial aircraft and related equipment at AirTran.
42. Sprague presented evidence himself and through other witnesses that he can in fact hear warning and other sounds in the work environment of a line mechanic, including medical evidence that, with a hearing aid, he can hear warning sounds and noises created by vehicles and other machinery in the United gate and hangar areas at Logan Airport. In addition, Sprague has shown that he is particularly sensitive to stimuli through his other senses, including sight and perception of vibrations, which helps him compensate in part for his hearing impairment.
43. Further, the evidence at trial demonstrated that the very nature of the work environment of line mechanics prevents any line mechanic from relying too much on hearing. A number of witnesses testified that the tarmac environment is extremely noisy. Indeed, the sound measurements taken at Logan by an acoustical consultant show that the sounds of nearby planes taking off, landing, and taxiing to and from gates are very loud and drown out many of the other sounds in the area. Mechanics, as well as all airport personnel, are required at all airlines to wear hearing protection while they are on the tarmac. This hearing protection, in the form of earplugs or earmuffs, further reduces mechanics' ability to hear while they are working on the tarmac. Several witnesses testified that it is at times very difficult, if not impossible, to engage in oral communication on the tarmac. Thus, mechanics working on a tarmac often use hand signals to communicate with one another. Fuller even suggested that Sprague may have an advantage on the tarmac over hearing mechanics because he is used to relying heavily on senses other than hearing. Thus, I find that despite his hearing impairment, Sprague can work safely on the airport tarmac at Logan Airport. The evidence convincingly demonstrates that, from a safety standpoint, Sprague is no worse off than non-disabled mechanics working on the tarmac.
44. However, even if United were correct that it may be unsafe for Sprague to work on the tarmac in the gate area, where there are moving vehicles and planes to be avoided, Sprague has presented evidence of a reasonable accommodation that United could have made for him. Sprague has presented persuasive evidence that United could have assigned him to the midnight shift at Logan, when there is far less activity in the tarmac area than during the day. In fact, United could have even restricted Sprague to work at United's hangar on the midnight shift, where there would be a number of other mechanics in his immediate vicinity who could alert him quickly to any possible dangers and where his supervisor could even keep a close, protective eye on him. United did not present persuasive evidence that assigning Sprague to the midnight shift, or restricting him to work at the hangar, would impose on it an undue burden.
45. At trial United appeared to contend that, even if it assigned Sprague to the midnight shift, it could not, consistent with the collective bargaining agreement in place between United and the mechanics' union, assure Sprague that he could stay on the midnight shift. I do not find this argument to be credible. Under the collective bargaining agreement (Trial Ex. 120), shift assignments are made by seniority and mechanics can bid, based on their seniority, for particular shifts. All of the line mechanics who were hired around the same time Sprague was offered a position were assigned to the midnight shift, and they were still on the midnight shift three years later at the time of trial. Thus, if Sprague had begun work at Logan when the job was initially offered to him, in April 1997, he too could have begun and probably continued on the midnight shift. In addition, since that time, United has hired more mechanics, and Sprague would now have seniority over these new mechanics. Thus, in the unlikely event that mechanics were ever bumped from the midnight shift to one of the day shifts, Sprague would likely be able to elect to stay on the midnight shift. The midnight shift has the largest number of mechanics of all three shifts, since that is when the majority of line maintenance work is done. Several witnesses testified that working on the midnight shift is generally the least desirable shift and, throughout the airline industry, it is the more senior mechanics who are able to work on one of the day shifts. United did not present persuasive evidence that it would present an undue burden to assign Sprague to the midnight shift, nor would it be a burden in any way to keep him on the midnight shift, if he were willing to remain there.
46. United emphasized its concern regarding Sprague's safety when the hydraulic system on a plane is operating. However, there are several safeguards which protect mechanics in such circumstances. Whenever the hydraulic system on a plane is activated, the mechanic is required to visually inspect the exterior of the aircraft to make sure that there are no people in the vicinity and let them know that he or she is about to activate the hydraulics. The mechanic is then required to turn on the plane's anti-collision lights, which are rotating beacon lights, to notify others to stay away from the plane. Mechanics are subject to discipline if they fail to follow this protocol. Because of these required procedures, Sprague would be adequately warned and his safety not endangered when a hydraulic system is operated.
2. Receiving aircraft
47. On its reasonable accommodation procedure form completed after Sprague's job offer had been withdrawn (Trial Ex. 217), United indicated that Sprague would not be able to receive aircraft. I am persuaded, however, based on the following evidence, that Sprague can satisfactorily perform that function.
48. The evidence showed that typically receipt of aircraft requires that the mechanic guide the aircraft into its parking spot at the gate using wands; conduct a walk-around inspection of the aircraft; go up to the cockpit to check the pilot's logbook, and perhaps talk briefly with the flight crew to determine if any maintenance issues need to be attended to while the aircraft is on the ground; and finally, perform any maintenance that may be required before the aircraft departs for its next flight. Sprague can perform these functions. In fact, his work at AirTran has included receipt of aircraft, including the task of going up to the cockpit to check the logbook and talk with the flight crew. While he worked for AirTran at Logan, his supervisor never received any complaints about his communication skills, nor did his deafness cause any problems at AirTran during his receipt of aircraft.
49. United has argued that Sprague could not receive aircraft because it is sometimes necessary for the line mechanic performing the receipt function to plug in a headset at the nose of the aircraft and speak with the flight crew. United claims that using the headset may be necessary on a quick turnaround when the flight crew has radioed in a problem in advance and the receiving mechanic needs to communicate with the crew immediately about the problem upon its arrival. However, I am persuaded that plugging in a headset to talk to the flight crew is not an essential function of the job of a line mechanic. Several other airlines do not have their mechanics plug in headsets to talk to flight crews upon receipt, but instead have their mechanics go up to the cockpit to talk with the flight crew face-to-face when communication between them is necessary. While communicating with the crew by intercom through a headset may be convenient, it is not essential.
3. Dispatching aircraft
50. On the reasonable accommodation procedure form, United indicated that Sprague would not be able to dispatch aircraft. I am persuaded, however, that Sprague can in fact participate in dispatching aircraft.
51. Dispatch of planes is performed with one individual operating a tow truck that pushes the aircraft away from the gate. The individual in the tow truck is usually in contact with the flight crew via intercom. When the intercom is inoperative, hand signals are used for communication. Sprague is able to communicate using hand signals. Moreover, at least one wingwalker is always involved in a dispatch to ensure that the plane does not collide with other objects in the gate area. The wingwalker communicates with the flight crew and tow truck using hand signals. If it were not possible for Sprague to operate the tow truck, it would be a reasonable accommodation, without any undue burden, for United to assign him the role of wingwalker during dispatch operations.
4. Moving aircraft (towing and taxiing)
52. On the reasonable accommodation procedure form, United indicated that Sprague would not be able to tow aircraft. I am persuaded, however, that Sprague can in fact participate in moving aircraft, either through towing or taxiing.
53. Aircraft that need to be moved, either from one gate to another, or from a gate to the hangar or to a remote location, are moved by mechanics either by towing or taxiing. In a towing operation, the plane is pulled by a towtruck, similarly to how a plane is moved away from a gate during dispatch. In taxiing, the plane moves using its own power, with mechanics in the cockpit driving the plane.
54. When a plane is being towed, one mechanic is in the cockpit riding the brakes of the aircraft. Another mechanic drives the tow truck, which pulls or pushes the aircraft, depending on which direction the towtruck is facing. One or two mechanics act as wingwalkers. During towing, it is necessary for either the mechanic driving the towtruck or the mechanic in the cockpit to be in radio contact with the control tower in order to receive directions and instructions regarding when and where it is safe for the towing to proceed. Thus, Sprague can participate in towing either by acting as a wingwalker or by riding brakes in the plane's cockpit provided that the tow truck driver is in radio contact with the control tower.
55. In a taxiing operation, there are always at least two mechanics in the cockpit. One mechanic in the cockpit drives the aircraft, and the other is in radio communication with the control tower. The one in communication with the control tower indicates to the one driving the aircraft when the plane is permitted to move forward, when it must stop, whether it must turn, and so on.
56. While at AirTran, Sprague successfully taxied aircraft by serving as the mechanic driving the plane, while another mechanic communicated with the control tower and used hand gestures to communicate to Sprague the tower's instructions.
5. Working alone at remote locations
57. On the reasonable accommodation procedure form, United indicated that Sprague would not be able to work alone at remote locations. I am persuaded, however, that Sprague can in fact work alone at remote locations.
58. Sprague has demonstrated that there is no reason that he cannot work alone at remote locations, since he has often worked alone at remote locations while at AirTran. The remote locations at which he has worked for AirTran in Fort Lauderdale are out of view of the terminal area, just as they are at Logan Airport.
59. United apparently contends that it would be dangerous for Sprague to work alone at remote locations because he might encounter some emergency and need to contact his supervisor or someone else back at the maintenance office for assistance. However, Sprague has presented persuasive evidence that there would be no safety risk for him to work at a remote location. If he had an emergency, he could either get the attention of another person in the area by using a suitable attention-getting device, such as an air horn or a whistle, or he could use a pager to page his supervisor or the maintenance office for help.
60. Sprague uses a pager which allows him to send faxes, e-mails, or other text and spoken messages and to receive text messages almost instantaneously. The pager has a voice-to-text and text-to-voice feature that allows him to use the pager to send and receive messages by telephone. The pager vibrates to let Sprague know when he has received a message. He has used this pager successfully at different locations at Logan Airport on approximately 30 occasions. He has never had difficulty sending or receiving a message at Logan Airport. These messages have always been clear. Sprague has programmed his pager with emergency phone numbers, for example the fire department and police department at Fort Lauderdale airport, in order to send emergency messages quickly. Sprague has tested the amount of time it takes to send a message from one pager to another and found it to be under 10 seconds. It takes approximately 15 seconds to send an e-mail using his pager. The pager also has a chat function which allows instantaneous communication between two pagers. The expense of acquiring pagers for Sprague and co-workers with whom he needs to communicate would not be an undue burden for United and would be a reasonable accommodation to Sprague's disability.
61. At trial United argued that pagers are unreliable at Logan Airport because so-called "dead spots" exist at the airport where pagers cannot send and receive messages. Sprague presented sufficient evidence at trial to convince me that such dead spots do not exist to such a degree that he would be prevented from using his pager at United. Sprague testified that he had tested his pager at various locations around Logan and found no area in which his pager did not work.
62. Furthermore, the evidence indicated that remote locations at which aircraft are serviced at night are not all that remote from other aircraft and personnel. In fact, one of United's main "remote locations," the North Cargo area, is directly adjacent to the United hangar, where many United mechanics work every night and where they would be nearby to help Sprague in the event of an emergency. The North Cargo area normally has other aircraft and maintenance personnel from a number of airlines working there. Thus, when mechanics work at remote locations, there are usually other aircraft parked nearby with mechanics working on them. In an emergency, the mechanic could get assistance from one of the other mechanics in the vicinity. According to at least one witness, it is customary for mechanics to help each other regularly. Mechanics at remote locations have their own vehicles and can drive to get help. Lead mechanics working the night shift monitor the remote locations to check on the mechanics working there.
6. Detecting aircraft warning signals
63. On the reasonable accommodation procedure form, United indicated that Sprague would not be able to hear aircraft warning signals. I am persuaded, however, that Sprague can in fact hear most aircraft warning signals and that this concern in no way justifies United's refusal to employ Sprague as a line mechanic at Logan.
64. The evidence indicated that the audible warnings on United's planes are very loud and that Sprague would be able to hear these warnings. Dr. Reardon, who has 22 years of experience working with people with hearing impairments and who has treated approximately 400-500 deaf patients over his career, testified that Sprague, using an analog hearing aid, can hear sounds starting at 45 decibels and can pick up speech sounds at the range of 50 to 55 decibels. Dr. Reardon also testified that, with his hearing aid, Sprague can hear, over the background noise, all of the warning sounds and other noises, such as moving vehicles, which occur in the work environment of United line mechanics. The report of the acoustical consultant showed that sounds in the gate area are primarily in the 60 to 90 decibel range, which is well above the level at which Sprague can hear, and that sounds in the hangar area, where there is lower background noise, are also mostly well above 60 decibels. In addition, most of these warnings (including the APU fire warning and the ground equipment cooling fan warning) have a visual as well as an audible component.
65. According to Sprague himself and other witnesses, with an analog hearing aid, he has been able to hear audible cockpit warnings while working for AirTran, including the ground proximity warning, the engine fire and APU warnings, the passenger public address system, and the passenger call button. With new digital hearing aids, he has been able to detect sounds he could not previously hear, such as the fan over his stove, the cooling fan on his computer, and the sound of cars driving by his house.
66. Other line mechanics and supervisors who have worked with Sprague provided further confirmation that he is able to hear well enough to work safely in an airport environment and perform the essential functions of an aircraft line mechanic. For example, his supervisor at AirTran Airlines at Logan Airport testified that Sprague could hear such sounds as audible cockpit warnings. His supervisor at the Taunton Airport also testified that Sprague was able to check audible warnings on planes.
7. Operational checks
67. Although United did not raise the issue when it withdrew the Logan job offer, nor later when it prepared its reasonable accommodation form, United argued at trial that Sprague would not be able to perform various operational checks on aircraft because such checks require intercom communication between two line mechanics. However, Sprague has performed such checks in his work at AirTran using hand signals. Hand signals are routinely and safely used at other airlines to perform operational checks. Thus, even if United were correct that Sprague could not perform two-mechanic operational checks using an intercom, it would be a reasonable accommodation for United to allow Sprague to perform these checks using hand signals. United failed to persuade me that it would suffer an undue burden if Sprague were allowed to use hand signals during operational checks. Even if it were, the few parts of any operational checks that he would be unable to perform constitute such a minor part of a mechanic's job that they are not, considered by themselves, an essential function of the job of a line mechanic.
8. Repairing passenger entertainment systems
68. Although United did not raise this issue when it first withdrew the Logan job offer, nor later when it prepared its reasonable accommodation form, United at trial argued that Sprague would not be able to work as a line mechanic at Logan Airport because he cannot repair passenger entertainment systems. I am not persuaded, however, that repairing passenger entertainment systems is, considered by itself, an essential function of the job of every line mechanic.
69. Sprague is in fact able to perform much work on passenger entertainment systems, though he cannot, for example, test the quality of the sound systems. Fuller testified from his review of actual maintenance records that problems with passenger entertainment systems take up less than 2% of a line mechanic's time. A detailed analysis of the overnight maintenance records contained in Trial Exhibit 300 confirms that passenger entertainment system repair work comprises a very small proportion of United line mechanics' time at Logan Airport. Arranging for another mechanic to perform those few tasks that Sprague cannot perform would be a reasonable accommodation, without undue hardship to United.
9. Miscellaneous other issues raised by United
70. Although United did not raise these issues when it first withdrew the Logan job offer, nor later when it prepared its reasonable accommodation form, at trial United argued that some other miscellaneous tasks must be performed by all of its Logan line mechanics and that Sprague would not be able to perform these tasks because of his deafness. For each of these tasks, however, I am persuaded either that Sprague can perform it with or without reasonable accommodation or that the task is not an essential function of the job of a line mechanic.
a. Communicating with supervisors and co-workers about gate changes, emergencies, etc.
71. United argued that Sprague would not be able to work as a line mechanic at Logan Airport because he would not be able to communicate by radio with his supervisors or co-workers regarding gate changes during one of the day shifts or during emergencies. While communicating effectively with other mechanics may be an essential function of the job, I am not persuaded that communicating with others by radio is an essential function of the job of a line mechanic. To the extent that communicating with others more generally is an essential function, Sprague has presented credible evidence that there are other ways by which he could engage in such communications as may be necessary on the job.
72. Most obviously, if Sprague were working on a day shift performing receipt and dispatch functions, his supervisors or co-workers could find him and tell him face-to-face if there were any last-minute gate changes of which he needed to be aware. United's gates are located in two clusters on the same aircraft terminal at Logan, and thus United's day shift line mechanics are in close proximity to other mechanics. It would not be an undue burden on United to have someone inform Sprague face-to-face about information such as gate changes.
73. Alternatively, Sprague could stay in communication with his supervisors or co-workers using his pager as described above. He could also be informed of gate and other flight changes by using United's automatic e-mail message system that keeps passengers or staff aware of gate changes, and flight arrival and departure time changes. Sprague testified that he signed up for this service using his pager and has been able to use the service to obtain information about specific United flight arrivals and departures by receiving automatic message notifications regarding all such changes on his pager.
74. If he were working on receipt and dispatch on a day shift, Sprague could also be kept informed of changes in flight schedules by watching the computer monitors in the airport that indicate flight information.
b. Communicating with pilots and others about aircraft problems
75. United also argued that Sprague could not be a line mechanic at Logan because line mechanics at times need to communicate by radio with pilots en route or with the United operations center about aircraft problems. The evidence presented at trial demonstrates, however, that radio communications between pilots (or the operations center) and the Logan maintenance base are made through lead supervisory mechanics, not line mechanics. At other airlines, line mechanics do not engage in these communications. For example, at another airline, problems radioed in by pilots are communicated to the mechanic crew chief, who then passes the information on to line mechanics. Mechanics at the other airline do not carry radios.
c. Engine changes
76. Although United contended at trial that Sprague could not participate in an engine change using a chain pull, Sprague presented credible evidence that he could in fact perform this function. Several witnesses testified that this task could be easily and safely accomplished with the use of hand signals.
d. Engine runup
77. Although United contended that engine runup is another task that would prevent Sprague from working as a line mechanic, the evidence presented at trial shows that he could in fact perform this task using hand signals to communicate with the other mechanics involved in the task. Indeed, when AirTran mechanics run engines at Logan Airport, there are normally two mechanics in the cockpit, one at the nose of the plane, and one near the engines checking for leaks or adjustments being made to the engine. These mechanics typically communicate using hand signals. When mechanics at another airline perform engine leak checks, three mechanics are also involved — one in the cockpit operating the engine, one at the nose, the third by the engine looking for the leak — and the mechanics communicate using hand signals. I find that Sprague is able to participate in engine runup by using hand signals.
e. Use of boroscopes
78. United also contended at trial that Sprague could not use a boroscope, an instrument employed in examining internal parts of an engine. Utilizing the instrument requires communication with a co-worker. When he worked as a shop mechanic at United's San Francisco MOC, Sprague was trained in the use of a boroscope, and he used a boroscope there several times a week. Fuller testified that Sprague could use a boroscope with hand signals. In addition, another witness testified that there is a technique that would permit a mechanic to use a boroscope without the assistance of another mechanic. I find that Sprague is able to perform this function satisfactorily.
f. Checking passenger address systems
79. At trial, United contended that Sprague cannot be a line mechanic for United at Logan because he could not check the functioning or clarity of passenger address systems. First, I find that Sprague can tell if a passenger address system is functioning at all. He can hear sufficiently well to detect whether speech is occurring. Although Sprague would probably not be able to detect whether a passenger address system was producing sound clearly, the relationship of this discrete task to the universe of duties expected of a line mechanic is such that it cannot in isolation be regarded as an essential function of the job of line mechanic that would disqualify Sprague from holding the job. United did not present credible evidence that all line mechanics must be able to perform this simple and brief task. As some witnesses (including Fuller) testified, checking the passenger address system takes, at most, a matter of seconds or minutes and to have another available mechanic perform this brief task would be a reasonable accommodation that would not impose any undue hardship on United.
g. Diagnosing mechanical problems by sound
80. United appeared to contend at trial that Sprague could not be a line mechanic because he could not diagnose mechanical problems of aircraft by sound. However, I am persuaded that line mechanics seldom, if ever, diagnose mechanical problems by sound. Diagnosing by sound is not an essential function of the job.
h. Other particular tests
81. At trial, United contended that Sprague could not perform several other particular tests, including a "ball screw lube," a "snap test," and a "sync-lock check." United contended that intercom communication was necessary to perform these tasks. However, United's evidence failed to establish either that any of these discrete tasks constituted an essential function of the line mechanic's job or that Sprague would be unable to perform the task if it were. To the contrary, there was evidence that each of these tasks can be, and is at at least one other airline, performed without the use of intercom communication.
IV. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing findings of fact, I conclude that Sprague has demonstrated that he can perform most of the essential functions of a United line mechanic without reasonable accommodations and all of the essential functions with reasonable accommodations. The tasks that Sprague cannot perform are not, in context, essential functions of the job. United did not show that any of Sprague's proposed reasonable accommodations would cause it undue hardship.
Since I find that United violated the ADA by refusing to employ Sprague, it is not necessary to decide whether United's failure to engage in the interactive process constituted a separate violation of the ADA.
V. Remedies and Supporting Findings of Facts A. Reinstatement
82. Absent extraordinary circumstances, victims of unlawful discrimination are entitled to be made whole for their losses. Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 421-22 (1975). In Quint v. A.E. Staley Mfg. Co., 172 F.3d 1, 19 (1st Cir. 1999), the court noted that:
Reinstatement is the `overarching preference' among all equitable remedies under the ADA, as it most efficiently furthers `the dual goals of providing full coverage for the plaintiff and of deterring such conduct by employers in the future.'
Id. (quoting Kerr-Selgas v. American Airlines, Inc., 104 F.3d 9, 12-13 (1st Cir. 1997)). United is therefore ordered to offer Sprague the line mechanic job at Logan Airport with full seniority and benefits retroactive to April 21, 1997, the date he would have begun work had United not rescinded the offer.
B. Lost Wages
83. The Court finds that, as a result of United's withdrawal of the Logan line maintenance job offer, Sprague has lost wages as of June 30, 2000, in the amount of $21,281. This amount is calculated as follows:
84. The wage scale for United mechanics is set forth in the collective bargaining contract between United and the union representing United's mechanical employees. The wage rate for the line mechanic position at Logan Airport that United offered Sprague in April 1997 was $15.35 per hour. This figure includes base pay of $13.05, $1 per hour high skill premium pay, $1.20 license pay, and $.10 line pay. In addition, United mechanics working the night shift earn an additional $.58 per hour premium pay. At the time of the job offer, United mechanics on the midnight shift worked 8 hours per day five days a week. After 18 months (October 21, 1998), Sprague's hourly base pay would have increased to $14.85. After an additional 18 months (April 21, 1999), his base pay would have increased to $15.78. After an additional 6 months (October 21, 1999), his base pay would have increased to $17.40. After an additional 6 months (April 21, 2000), his base pay would have increased to $19.77. Sprague's straight time earnings from United from April 21, 1997, through June 30, 2000, based on the wage scale set forth in the union contract, would have been $116,615.
85. Sprague was actually employed by American Aero Services from April 21, 1997 through March 6, 1998; by United Air Lines from March 9, 1998 through July 2, 1999, and by AirTran Airlines from July 5, 1999 through trial. Sprague's wages for the years 1997-1999 are reflected in his tax returns and W-2 forms. His 2000 salary from AirTran can be calculated by using the salary scale listed in the collective bargaining agreement covering AirTran mechanics. The hourly wage of an AirTran mechanic with 7-12 months' seniority during the period from January 1, 2000 through April 1, 2000 was $15.50. From April 1, 2000 through July 5, 2000 the hourly rate increased to $16.25. After July 5, 2000 the hourly rate will increase to $17.25. In addition, mechanics holding A P licenses earn an additional $1 per hour. Sprague's actual earnings during this period were $95,334.
86. Accordingly, Sprague's damages for lost income through June 30, 2000 equal the difference between the amount he would have earned at United ($116,615), and the amount he actually earned ($95,334). This difference, for the period April 21, 1997 to June 30, 2000, equals $21,281.
87. Sprague will also be entitled to the difference between his actual earnings and what he would have earned working for United as a line mechanic at Logan from July 1, 2000 through the date of his actual hire by United in accordance with the judgment to be entered in this case. By a separate order, I will direct the parties to submit written computations of the amount so to be awarded.
88. I also find that Sprague's failure to accept United's offer of the job at its San Francisco MOC until March, 1998 did not constitute a failure to mitigate damages. The duty to mitigate does not require a plaintiff to accept employment outside the geographic area of his former employment. See Quint v. A.E. Staley Mfg. Co., 172 F.3d at 16; Odima v. Westin Tucson Hotel, 53 F.3d 1484, 1497 (9th Cir. 1995).
C. Lost Benefits
89. Sprague will be entitled to seniority benefits reflecting a date of hire of April 21, 1997. Pension benefits of United mechanics are set forth in the collective bargaining agreement.
D. Emotional Distress
90. Sprague suffered severe emotional distress as a result of his treatment by United. In his words, he "totally crashed" after the job offer was withdrawn. He had devoted years of work to obtaining a job with a major airline and was deeply hurt when the offer was withdrawn. In the period after the job offer was withdrawn he lost interest in his usual activities, including spending time with his family and doing work around the house. He found it difficult to concentrate, had trouble sleeping, and suffered loss of appetite. He was still upset by United's actions, as his demeanor at trial demonstrated. Sprague's testimony about the emotional effects of the withdrawal of the offer of employment was confirmed by every witness who knew him at the time. His wife, Susan, testified that her husband was very upset, depressed, angry, and hurt following withdrawal of the job offer. She observed that he did not eat, smoked more, and withdrew from his family and friends. His boss at the time, Mike Dupont, observed that Sprague became withdrawn and silent. Jim LaBrecque testified that Sprague was tearful. Based on this testimony, it is evident that United's action in withdrawing the Logan job offer caused Sprague substantial emotional distress.
91. In addition, after Sprague accepted the MOC shop mechanic job in San Francisco that United offered when it withdrew the Boston job offer, he was separated from his family for a 15-month period. He traveled across the country every weekend to visit his family. He found the separation painful and difficult. Sprague also had to separate from his family to continue his work for AirTran at the Fort Lauderdale airport. I find that Sprague's periods of separation from his family resulting from United's withdrawal of the line mechanic job at Logan Airport have caused him substantial additional emotional distress.
92. Under all the circumstances, I find that an award of compensatory damages for emotional distress of $100,000 is appropriate and merited.
E. Punitive Damages
93. The Court further holds that Sprague is entitled to punitive damages because the actions of United in withdrawing the line mechanic job offer were done with the "knowledge that it may be acting in violation of federal law." Kolstad v. American Dental Ass'n, 527 U.S. 526, 535 (1999); EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 187 F.3d 1241, 1244-46 (10th Cir. 1999).
94. The absence of a bona fide belief that the refusal to hire Sprague was lawful is amply demonstrated by the shifting and serial justifications advanced by United. The refusal to engage Sprague in a genuine interactive process or to entertain with any degree of seriousness the possibility of reasonable accommodations to his disability warrant the imposition of punitive damages, which are awarded in the sum of $200,000.
F. Attorneys' Fees and Expenses
95. Sprague is entitled to recover his attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in this lawsuit. Sprague's counsel are ordered to submit fee applications.
G. Prejudgment Interest
96. The Court awards prejudgment interest on its award at the rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
H. Postjudgment Interest
97. The Court also awards postjudgment interest on its award of damages pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961 from the date of judgment until the time the judgment is paid.
IT IS SO ORDERED.