## Facts

- Robert Barnett injured his back while working as a cargo handler for U.S. Airways.
- Using seniority rights, Barnett transferred to a less physically demanding mailroom position.
- Under the employer’s seniority system, the mailroom job later became open to seniority-based bidding, and more senior employees intended to bid for it.
- Barnett requested an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) allowing him to remain in the mailroom despite the seniority bidding rules.
- U.S. Airways refused to make an exception; the bidding proceeded, and Barnett lost the position and ultimately his job.
- Barnett sued under the ADA, alleging failure to provide reasonable accommodation under 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A).
- The district court granted summary judgment for U.S. Airways, treating deviation from the seniority system as imposing undue hardship.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed, treating the seniority system as one factor within a fact-intensive undue-hardship inquiry.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

## Issues

1. Whether the ADA requires reassignment (or retention in a position) as a reasonable accommodation when doing so would conflict with an employer’s seniority system.
2. What showing an employer must make to defeat an ADA accommodation claim at summary judgment when the requested accommodation violates seniority rules.
3. Whether, and how, an employee may overcome a seniority-based objection to an accommodation request.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and remanded.
- The Court held that an employer’s showing that a requested accommodation conflicts with seniority rules ordinarily establishes that the accommodation is not reasonable.
- The Court further held that the employee may still prevail by producing evidence of special circumstances making a seniority-rule exception reasonable in the particular case.
- The Court rejected both an absolute rule that seniority conflicts can never be reasonable accommodations and an approach treating seniority as merely one factor always requiring a full undue-hardship balancing.

## Legal Principles

- ADA analysis commonly uses a burden-shifting approach: the employee must show a proposed accommodation is reasonable on its face (in the run of cases), then the employer may show case-specific reasons it is not required.
- A bona fide seniority system creates substantial employee reliance interests; accommodations requiring violation of such a system are presumptively not reasonable.
- The presumption is rebuttable: the employee bears the burden to show special circumstances making an exception reasonable (e.g., the employer frequently changes the seniority system or regularly makes exceptions such that expectations of uniform application are reduced).
- The seniority-based presumption concerns “reasonable accommodation” rather than treating all seniority deviations as automatic “undue hardship.”

## Conclusion

The Court held that requested ADA accommodations that would require violating a bona fide seniority system are ordinarily unreasonable, but an employee may overcome that presumption with evidence of special circumstances showing that a seniority exception would be reasonable in the specific workplace setting.


U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391 (2002)