Again the job market

I’m typing this on Monday afternoon. Given the posting schedule I imagine it’ll go live on Saturday sometime. I’ve spent the morning looking through LinkedIn for jobs. I must say that the job market is looking pretty healthy. Having that luxury (and not being completely strapped … yet) I’m trying to land something that has “career-potential”.

“WordPress, insert a generic work related image here!”
Photo by Mikhail Nilov on

Having had a number of jobs over the years that were limited to about a year, I’d really like to find something I can build on in a sustainable way. In the meantime, I’ve found one publisher that pays for short articles which I should be able to crank out reasonably effectively.

I really wish I’d kept my old typewriter
Photo by Min An on

Things, in short, don’t look so bad. Aut inveniam viam aut faciam.

Whittaker v America’s Car-Mart Inc. (2014) H&FLR 2014-7

Whittaker v America’s Car-Mart Inc. (2014) H&FLR 2014-7

United States District Court (E.D. Missouri)

24 April 2014

Coram: Limbaugh DJ

Appearing for the Plaintiff: Mr Mark Welker of Jackson & Welker)

Appearing for the Defendant: Not identified.

Catchwords: Missouri – termination of employment – obesity – Americans with Disabilities Act – disability – discrimination

Facts: The plaintiff commenced employment with the defendant in August 2005.  He was dismissed from the position of General Manager on 1 November 2012.  He alleged that he was dismissed by reason of his severe obesity which he asserted was a disability within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 (Act).  He did not require any special provision to be made by his employer in order to discharge his duties.

The defendant applied to dismiss the discrimination proceeding on the basis that severe obesity is not a disability under the Act unless it relate to an underlying physiological condition.

Held, dismissing the application,

(1) The Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act 2008 (Amending Act) requires “disability” to be construed in favour of broad coverage of claimants.

Toyota Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc v Williams, 534 US 184 (2002), disapproved.

(2) Because of the expanded coverage effected by the Amending Act, it was open to argue that obesity can be a disability.

Lowe v American Eurocopter LLC, No. 1: 10CV24-AD (N.D. Miss. Dec. 16, 2010), followed.


The Court’s judgment is available here.