Case 12.5 Leonel v. American Airlines, Inc., poses some unusual circumstances to the legal minded individual, but also rises some ethical and socially unacceptable facets to the case. I feel like the applicants won the suit on a mere technicality, though the ADA does provide support for people like the applicants here in this case, and American Airlines must show that they are willing to work with people with disabilities. As the circumstances in the situation suggest, Leonel and the other applicants were offered employment that was contingent upon passing background checks and medical examinations. The hinging factor was that American Airlines decided to have the applicants complete the medical examinations first before the also required background checks. FindLaw.com says this about the case: "When employers rescind offers made conditional on both non-medical and medical contingencies, applicants cannot easily discern or challenge the grounds for rescission. When medical considerations are isolated, however, applicants know when they have been denied employment on medical grounds and can challenge an allegedly unlawful denial." (Findlaw, 2016) This is the mistake that American Airlines made. They allowed the circumstances to dictate how their procedures were carried out. At the least they should have waited to rescind the offers of employment until after all examinations were completed. This might have provided more of a covering and could have prevented this type of lawsuit. However, as stated by the ADA in our textbook "Employers may require a medical examination only after a job offer has been made. The job offer may be made contingent upon passing the medical test, so the test must be administered after all other hiring information is obtained and found satisfactory." (Melvin & Katz, n.d.) So the mistake was not in having the applicants complete the medical examination, but rather having them complete the medical before the background check. Having the applicants prematurely complete the medical examination after which American Airlines rescinded the employment offers, and then citing the applicants' failures to disclose the relevant information. It was at this point that the conditional offer of employment was nullified. Because of this factor the argument can be made that the offer was never a true conditional offer of employment since the original agreement was not carried out in the predetermined order. The offer of employment was contingent upon the completion of all the processes to include: the background check and the medical examination. If the whole process is not carried out in the order specified by the ADA and FEHA then it can be argued that the offer was not fully available to the applicants. American Airlines could not show that it could not have completed the background checks first, nor could it prove that all other avenues had been exhausted in order to stay within the ADA's and FEHA's guidelines. American Airlines having said that the process was carried out in this manner in order to stay competitive, and that it was more convenient for the applicants. In turn it appears that American Airlines held little regard for the applicants attempt to conceal their medical conditions until they had completed all other parts of the hiring process. The ADA and FEHA allow applicants to keep these conditions private until the last stage of the hiring process. It is an attempt of confidentiality in the workplace. Whenever it comes to seeing what the Bible says about issues of keeping your end of any agreements, Numbers 30:2 says "If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth". (King James Version) I believe that American Airlines should have carried out their end of the agreement, even if they had to alter their other plans. Never mind the impact on schedule, or the attempt to stay competitive. Medical tests should be given only after all nonmedical tests are completed satisfactorily to prevent the appearance of discrimination against any and all people with disabilities. As I stated before, whenever medical circumstances are isolated and the applicants know when they have been denied employment on medical grounds alone then you have a problem. The court, in turn, decided that American Airlines never truly tendered a conditional offer of employment since they did not follow through with their end of the agreement. They did not complete their whole pre-employment screening, and rescinded the employment offer on one aspect of the procedure. Since they only completed a small part of the screening and made their decision based on that, then American Airlines violated the ADA's guidelines for working with people with disabilities. A true conditional offer of employment would have been fulfilled if American Airlines had either completed the screening in the correct order no matter how long it took, or worked around doing the medical screening first by sending the applicants back to their home cities and had them complete the medical screening remotely. Either way they should have done all that they could do to provide provision to offer to the applicants.

References
1. Findlaw,. (2016). FindLaw's United States Ninth Circuit case and opinions.. Retrieved 20 February 2016, from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1224462.html

2. Melvin, S., & Katz, M. The legal environment of business.
3. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing,. (2009). Disability Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (pp. 1-3).