Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
You obviously either do not understand what I said or you do not understand what ADA is for. Let me ask you a question. Do you have a lawsuit where someone won based on ADA to officiate any level of game? If there is not such a lawsuit you might have a hard to time get a court to say anyone has violated ADA if he has other options to umpire. There have been many lawsuits lost based on ADA because it was not appropriate for the particular industry or activity. I guess the military would be violating ADA if they did not allow a disabled person to serve in the military or if they discharged someone after they were clearly injured or disabled while serving? That last part happens all the time.
Also it is not like his only option is to use the protector. He could put something directly on his arm or he could put his arm behind his back. I am certain there is something he could do other than using a balloon protector if the only fear is him getting hit in the arm and damaging his arm further. And let us just change the sport, would a football official have to use a balloon protector too and if not they people that hired them? There are a lot of ways to get hurt than a ball hitting you and those that do officiate take some risk to participate.
Seriously I doubt that any one umpire is not going to move up just because of one issue. Also it is laughable that you use the NF rules to justify this when how people move up or do not move up have little to do what is in a book. First of all states/organizations can completely ignore that standard or use their own for their umpires. You know like what color shirts their where and what other equipment they use. The NF has no power to decide what folks wear or what other levels decide.
Also if discrimination is your point of view, then there are a lot of people that would have that claim and it would not be based on ADA. I do not see those lawsuits flying out the door either. And I can tell you there is more evidence of discrimination based on race or gender than there ever would be for ADA from an officiating standpoint.
The reason many people do not use the balloon protector anymore is because it limits movement and as it might protect you initially, it certainly does not endorse good movement as you have to carry around this big *** contraption to just start to run from one place to another. I have yet to see an umpire do that smoothly or get to where they need to without being a little clumsy. That is the bigger problem, not just how it looks.
Also I work almost all varsity and up in my games and I rarely get hit at all. I can go through a season and count on one hand how many times I get hit outside of my equipment by a baseball. And in some cases that only happens 1 or 2 times an entire season.
Peace
|
Allright, Jeff. Good discussion. You raise some good points, but you fail to recognize mine. Fine.
The bigger point here is this guy has been told he's looking at the amputation of his arm if he takes a direct shot. To him, he's limiting the risk as much as possible in order to do something he loves. He's disappointed he can't move up, but I believe he's come to terms with it. There is nothing unreasonable about wearing a balloon protector and in my opinion shouldn't be denied an opportunity to advance. He has been told EXACTLY why he won't move up: not because he's not worthy, but because he uses a balloon protector. He's explained why he does and he's been told it doesn't matter. To me, that is a potentially discriminatory decision.
There's a term in the ADA called "Reasonable Accomodation." You should look it up. That would help you understand why your unrealistic and unreasonable (i.e.: to use your word, "laughable") scenarios do not apply.