Disability

If a prospective employer specifically asks about a candidate’s physical capacity to do a job and they say they can do all of the tasks required, and then notify us afterwards that they need accommodations for things they said they could do without them, are we:

a) by law required to provide them 

OR

A minefield, indeed.[1]

The first issue in this question is the premise: “If a prospective employer specifically asks about a candidate’s physical capacity to do a job and they say they can do all of the tasks required…”

My library knows that service animals provide vital assistance to patrons with disabilities, and that they must be allowed on library premises without pre-approval.

We also know that when a service animal is brought into the library by a visitor, we can only ask if the animal is needed for a disability, and what work or task it has been trained to provide.

First: Because of the restrictions you cite, continue to not take the bait! If this person is indeed taunting library workers and daring them to deny access, continue to address the situation with tactical restraint.[1]

A member of the public called me regarding the trend to switch to LED lighting in many libraries, especially rural libraries applying for NYS Public Library Construction Funding. She told me that she suffers from Photosensitive Epilepsy, and LED lights (among other light sources) cause her to have seizures, which result in injuries.

This question is at the tip of a large and fast-moving iceberg.

As with many iceberg-type issues, when I started my research, I didn’t know how deep things went.

So, I did my usual thing when a question involves the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), went to AskJAN.org, to see what they had to say about LEDs and epilepsy.

[This question comes from a regional BOCES.]

Our technology integration specialist suggested that we use an AI tool to re-level books/text by an original author to a more appropriate reading level for students who are struggling. This is now being used regularly with our special education staff for students who are struggling readers. Is this an infringement of copyright?

In the spirit of learning, I am going to answer this question in a multiple-choice quiz.  For purposes of the quiz, we’ll use the member’s term “re-level” for generating simplified versions of curricular materials.

[NOTE: If you are not feeling playful and just need the answer, please read footnote #2 and skip to the “Final Paragraphs” section of this response.]

We have a large facility. Sometimes patrons have to walk far to get to various programs and spaces. We have had a few patrons in the recent couple of months ask if we have a wheelchair or walker they could use to help them get around. We consulted with our insurance provider about this and he basically said to ask a lawyer.

This is such a beautiful idea! In my experience, there are three things that often impede beautiful ideas:

1. Insurance concerns;
2. Legal concerns; and
3. People who worry that there might be insurance or legal concerns.

This question shows how to protect an idea from these impediments:

Sometimes, people nap in the library, particularly people who we believe might not have stable or sufficient housing. We feel that a library should not exclude people who need a secure place to rest, so long as there is no interference with library operations, but are there any legal considerations to this issue?

This is a VERY sensitive issue. There are many factors that could contribute to a person sleeping in a public space, including:

My institution subscribes to the "Kurzweil Reading Program", a "Text-to-Speech" product for those with reading impairments (dyslexia, English language learners, blind/vision impaired, etc.)

Section 121 indicates these users are "eligible persons" for "fair use", but others, without such disabilities could use the program (like an audiobook in the car!).

This question reflects the level of savvy "Ask the Lawyer" readers bring to their submissions.  The member submitting the question has already set out (in a manner much more succinct than I usually achieve) the interplay of:

We were asked about signage to post over the copier at a schools where educational materials are copied. Below is some template language with footnotes explaining why they say what they do.  Of course, before posting in your school or library, check with your lawyer!

MAKING A COPY ON THIS MACHINE

MAY BE SUBJECT TO THE COPYRIGHT LAW OF THE UNITED STATES

This means 4 important things:

1.  Copying a copyright-protected work here could be a copyright violation[1].

We were asked about signage to post over the public copier at a libraries open to the public. Below is some template language with footnotes explaining why they say what they do.  Of course, before posting in your school or library, check with your lawyer!

MAKING A COPY ON THIS MACHINE

MAY BE SUBJECT TO THE COPYRIGHT LAW OF THE UNITED STATES[1]

This means 4 important things:

Students in a school are reading a simultaneous use eBook. The students with IEPs[1] have access to a screen reader but this feature is very robotic and doesn't meet their needs. The school librarian and the School Library System searched for an audio version of this book but could not find one for purchase.

The school may be covered by Fair Use but for this scenario, it doesn't need to be in order to make the recording proposed by the member.

Why?