A federal district court in Oregon recently awarded $26,952,863, including $25 million in punitive damages, to a train conductor whose employer automatically excluded him from returning to work after dislocating his shoulder. The employee, who had spent 20 years in the military and was physically active, injured his shoulder at home on his farm. He took a disciplined approach to his physical therapy and was cleared to return to work by his treating physician and physical therapist. However, the company had an informal policy prohibiting work in safety-sensitive jobs if an employee had an elevated risk of suffering certain types of injuries. For example, the company was concerned about the employee’s ability to climb ladders on train cars, even though he was climbing ladders on construction jobs that he took to pay the bills while waiting for reinstatement to his job at the railroad. The judge ruled that the company failed to individually assess the employee’s ability to perform the essential functions of his job under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Oregon state law, and accepted the jury’s recommendation of significant punitive damages (Granas v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, D Or, Aug. 2025).
Tips: The federal ADA limits total compensatory damages (noneconomic damages such as emotional distress) and punitive damages based on employer size ($300,000 for a large employer), but Oregon state law prohibiting disability discrimination in employment doesn’t have any such cap. Even under the ADA, there are no caps on awards of back pay, front pay, or attorney fees, so failing to go through the interactive process when an injured employee is ready to return to work can get very expensive. (Note: In lawsuits for employment discrimination based on state law, California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) allows awards of punitive damages; the Idaho Human Rights Act (IHRA) allows them but only up to $1,000 for each willful violation; and the Arizona Civil Rights Act (ACRA), Montana Human Rights Act (MHRA), and Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) don’t.)
If you have safety concerns, your best bet is usually to correspond with the employee’s health care provider to educate them about the job and any specific observations or concerns with the employee’s ability to perform it. Occasionally it may be helpful to ask for a second opinion, but there’s no clear path under the ADA to resolve differences in medical opinions, and a jury is more likely to trust an employee’s treating provider. For guidance on navigating disability accommodation requests, see our Legal Guide, ADA: Reasonable Accommodation and the Interactive Process, and contact your Vigilant Law Group employment attorney with any specific questions.
For employers seeking reliable guidance on difficult issues, our membership provides access to experienced professionals ready to help navigate situations just like this.
