Merit determinants of ADA Title I allegations filed by persons with mental illness

ADA Title I allegations are investigated and closed by the EEOC either with or without merit. Allegations resolved with merit indicate that actual disability employment discrimination took place against the person filing the allegation (the charging party) and those resolved without merit indicate that no discrimination took place. This study examined the drivers or predictors of merit in allegations filed by charging parties with mental illness (e.g., anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and unknown mental illness). Results indicated that the primary driver for ADA Title I allegations is [discrimination] Issue and corroborated the lower merit rate for mental illness allegations (19.83%) as compared to non mental illness allegations (23.39%). Further analysis of the Merit and Non Merit Resolution Types by non parametric tests of proportion between allegations filed by charging parties with mental illness and those filed by charging parties without mental illness also corroborated the lower mental illness allegation merit rate. The lower merit rate for mental illness allegations may indicate that: 1) there is less actual employment discrimination occurring against persons with mental illness; 2) that allegations filed by persons with mental illness are inherently difficult to prove; and/or 3) that the merit rate for mental illness allegations might be higher if they were not potentially under-reported. Implications, conclusions, and directions for future research are provided.