Uniontown man claims Penn State discriminated against his colorblindness

A Uniontown man’s lawsuit alleging Penn State University discriminated against him because he is colorblind will be allowed to move forward, a federal judge ruled.

Danny David, 48, sued the university late last year, claiming the school unjustly rescinded a job offer with the university police after discovering David is red/green colorblind.

University officials responded to the lawsuit Wednesday, contending that allowing David to circumvent the colorblindness parameters for police would “pose a direct threat to the health and/or safety of the university community.”

The school had “no basis to believe that (his) color vision deficiency would render him a direct threat,” David wrote in his lawsuit, which demands monetary damages and that his job offer be reinstated.

David was working as a public safety officer at the university in October 2017 when he applied to the university police force, according to the lawsuit, which calls the jobs “substantially similar.” He previously worked as a municipal officer and a sheriff’s deputy and had been certified by the Municipal Police Officers’ Education and Training Commission.

He allowed that certification to lapse, and the university was set to send his application to MPOETC for recertification.

The university extended a conditional employment offer in June 2018 contingent upon completion of “all medical requirements,” according to the lawsuit. The medical exam in July 2018 made the university aware of David’s colorblindness, and the employment offer was revoked.

David wrote that he provided the university with a letter from his ophthalmologist indicating his “red/green color deficit, in my medical opinion, will not affect his ability to perform his duties.”

The university, according to the lawsuit, should have conducted an individualized assessment to determine whether David’s colorblindness would affect his performance. The suit also claims the university never considered whether glasses or contact lenses would be a reasonable accommodation.

The judge ruled late last month to allow the case to move forward. A hearing is scheduled for Feb. 20.