## Facts

- The EEOC sued on behalf of Jessica Chrysler, a congenitally and profoundly deaf employee who communicated with hearing individuals through writing, gestures, and pantomime.
- The Picture People, Inc. (TPP), a retail portrait photography chain, hired Chrysler in October 2007 as a “performer” at its Littleton, Colorado store.
- TPP described the performer position as cross-trained across four functions: customer intake, sales, portrait photography, and photo laboratory work; TPP asserted performers generally had to perform all functions outside the holiday season.
- Chrysler interviewed through written communication and, on the job, attempted to communicate with customers using notes and nonverbal methods.
- TPP maintained that effective verbal customer communication—especially during 20-minute sessions involving young children—was necessary to direct subjects, complete sessions efficiently, and sell photo packages.
- After a manager concluded Chrysler’s communication methods were impractical for customer-facing work, TPP reassigned her primarily to the photo lab.
- In December 2007, TPP documented alleged lab performance problems and placed Chrysler on a performance-improvement track.
- Chrysler was not scheduled for further work after December 2007 and was formally terminated in October 2008.
- The EEOC alleged ADA discrimination (including failure to accommodate and discriminatory termination) and ADA retaliation based on Chrysler’s requests for ASL interpreters and other accommodations.

## Issues

1. Whether Chrysler was an ADA “qualified individual,” including whether effective oral/verbal communication with customers was an essential function of the performer position.
2. Whether the EEOC identified reasonable accommodations that would enable Chrysler to perform the essential functions without eliminating or reallocating them.
3. Whether TPP retaliated against Chrysler for requesting accommodations, and whether the EEOC produced evidence of pretext for TPP’s stated reasons for its actions.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for TPP.
- The court held Chrysler was not a qualified individual because effective verbal communication with hearing customers was an essential function of the performer job that she could not perform with the proposed accommodations.
- The court held the proposed accommodations (reliance on notes/gestures or limiting her to lab duties) did not make Chrysler qualified because they were impractical for the job’s customer-facing demands or would eliminate essential functions.
- The court rejected the retaliation claim, concluding the EEOC failed to show a legally sufficient basis to proceed and failed to present evidence from which a jury could find TPP’s stated reasons were pretextual.

## Legal Principles

- Under the ADA, a plaintiff must show she can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation.
- Essential functions are assessed by examining how the job is actually performed and may be supported by the employer’s judgment, job descriptions, and operational requirements.
- A reasonable accommodation does not require an employer to eliminate essential functions or permanently reassign core duties in a way that fundamentally changes the position.
- In ADA retaliation claims premised on adverse employment actions, the plaintiff must produce evidence sufficient to permit a finding that the employer’s stated legitimate reasons are pretext for retaliation.

## Conclusion

The court upheld summary judgment for the employer because the record established that effective verbal customer interaction was an essential function of the retail “performer” position, the proposed accommodations would not enable performance of that function without removing core duties, and the EEOC failed to show pretext on its retaliation theory.


Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Picture People, Inc., 684 F.3d 981 (10th Cir. 2012)