BATON ROUGE, La. – A Louisiana woman, who is hard of hearing, claims a Baton Rouge Hilton hotel refused to consider her for employment.
Plaintiff Donna Laird, in her filing, takes aim at the hotel chain’s reliance on an online application portal – Indeed.com – that required her to complete an audio-based screening assessment in October 2022.
Laird filed her lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
The named defendants are Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc., Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc. and Siegen Retail LLC. Siegen is the current franchisee, owner, operator, and manager of the Tru by Hilton in Baton Rouge.
Laird, an East Baton Rouge Parish resident, contends the Tru by Hilton hotel violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law.
“The Assessment did not provide an accessible alternative for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing,” her 17-page complaint states. “There were no captions, no written transcripts, no text-based alternative version, and no option to bypass the auditory components. As a result, Plaintiff could not complete the Assessment.”
She argues the assessment functioned as a “gatekeeping screening mechanism.”
“Applicants who did not complete the Assessment were not advanced for further consideration and were effectively rejected at the screening stage, regardless of their actual qualifications for the Position,” the complaint states.
Laird alleges that when she asked for a reasonable accommodation through the same portal, the defendants “ignored the request, refused to engage in any interactive process, and rejected her application without ever assessing her qualifications.”
“Defendants could have selected or configured an accessible alternative assessment, could have waived the Assessment for applicants who could not complete it due to disability, or could have permitted Plaintiff to demonstrate her qualifications through an alternative means, such as an interview,” her lawsuit states.
She was never afforded any alternative means to demonstrate her qualifications, she contends.
“She was never interviewed. She was never asked to perform any job-related task that she could have completed notwithstanding her disability,” the complaint states.
According to her filing, Laird claims that with “readily available and commonly used accommodations” – including written or visual forms of information exchange, captioned audio, and written or text-based communication – she can perform the essential functions of the front desk, guest services, housekeeping, or a related hotel position she sought.
She also shoots down assertions by Hilton that its assessment was designed by Indeed and that it bore no responsibility for its accessibility.
“That contention is both factually incorrect and legally unavailing,” her complaint states. “Defendants selected the Assessment; required its completion; relied on it to make employment decisions; controlled the configuration of the application portal; and controlled whether and how accommodations would be offered.”
Hilton cannot outsource their ADA obligations to a third-party vendor, Laird points out.
“A covered employer that adopts, requires, and relies upon a pre-employment assessment is responsible under the ADA for ensuring that the assessment – and the accommodation channel associated with it – is accessible to qualified individuals with disabilities,” the lawsuit states.
“Defendants’ refusal to provide an accessible assessment, to respond to Plaintiff’s accommodation request, or to offer any alternative means of demonstrating qualification, constitutes disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and unlawful use of qualification standards and selection criteria that screen out individuals with disabilities.”
Laird seeks permanent injunctive relief requiring the defendants to remediate their application process, as she alleges they continue to use the same or substantially similar “inaccessible screening mechanisms” at Tru by Hilton-branded hotels.
She also seeks compensatory and punitive damages, back pay, front pay and attorney fees.
Donald C. Hodge Jr. in Westminster, Colorado, is representing Laird in the lawsuit.
