Hoover v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.

33 Pa. D. & C.4th 422, 1996 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 183
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County
DecidedJuly 10, 1996
Docketno. CV-92-612
StatusPublished

This text of 33 Pa. D. & C.4th 422 (Hoover v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hoover v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co., 33 Pa. D. & C.4th 422, 1996 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 183 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996).

Opinion

SACAVAGE, J.,

On April 6, 1992, Dale Hoover, plaintiff, filed a complaint against Pennsylvania Power & Light Company Inc., defendant, alleging that he, the plaintiff, suffers from a learning disability, namely dyslexia, a “handicap” which falls within the protections of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, and that the defendant discriminated against him because of the learning disability and passed over him for job vacancies and promotions within the company. This matter came before the court at a non-jury trial on April 22, 1996. Based upon the testimony presented, the court adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.

FINDINGS OF FACT

(1) Dale Hoover, plaintiff, was hired by Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, defendant, on or about October 22, 1984.

(2) Plaintiff was employed as a construction helper located at defendant’s Brunner Island facility.

(3) The construction helper position often required plaintiff to work overtime and to be away from home overnight when plaintiff was working at other PP&L locations.

[424]*424(4) Plaintiff voluntarily bid from the construction helper position to a handyman position also at PP&L’s Brunner Island facility.

(5) Plaintiff was awarded the handyman position on March 5, 1990.

(6) Mr. Hoover has a learning disability, dyslexia, that affects his ability to read.

(7) In May 1990 and July 1990, plaintiff bid on two meter reader positions.

(8) A written examination was administered for each of the meter reader positions.

(9) Plaintiff requested a reader for the first examination.

(10) Plaintiff’s request for a reader was denied.

(11) Plaintiff failed both examinations.

(12) Plaintiff did not request a reader for the second meter reader test.

(13) The job responsibilities for the meter reader position require extensive reading and writing.

(14) The meter reader job responsibilities are performed by the meter reader working alone.

(15) The meter reader is responsible for 19 or 20 separate routes which are required to be read at intervals not less than 26 calendar days and not greater than 36 calendar days.

(16) Each route contains between 250 and 1200 separate meters.

(17) The reading of the routes requires the meter reader to travel to the municipality where the route begins and to locate the starting point of the route by use of maps.

(18) From the starting point, the meter reader is required to locate the various meters by name, address, [425]*425meter number, location information and access information and then to read and record from the various meters the applicable utility consumption and to record any applicable changes in the company records pertaining to the customer and meter, and to also record other observations concerning meter condition, meter access and utility consumption.

(19) Utility consumption is determined by reading and interpreting different types of meters and recording the readings.

(20) The most frequently used meter design contains five circular dials, each containing the numbers one through 10, and each counter-rotating from the rotational direction of the preceding dial.

(21) The meter reader is required to read the five-dial mechanical meter from right to left and to determine the reading of each dial by the location in the rotation of the preceding dial.

(22) The meter reader is also required to continuously update the route information and company records pertaining to the name, meter number, account number, meter conditions, location and access information, hazard conditions and possible diversions.

(23) The meter reader performs his reading and recording function by use of a hand-held, multi-functional processor, which communicates by printed words in a view screen, and receives information by numbers, words and codes inputted by a keypad.

(24) The keypad contains function keys, number keys, letter keys, control keys, shift keys and arrow keys. The letter keys are used for the dual role of selecting commands and inputting information.

[426]*426(25) The use of the command keys, control keys and arrow keys is communicated by written abbreviations and/or symbols on the keypad.

(26) In response to the use of the command keys, control keys and function keys, printed information, menus and/or codes appear in the view screen.

(27) The meter reader must respond to the written messages, menus or codes appearing in the view screen by pressing appropriate keys on the keypad.

(28) Use of the control key produces menus of code numbers and written explanations.

(29) There are in excess of 100 separate codes and messages.

(30) The meter reader must read the message and select and enter the applicable numerical code pertaining to the message.

(31) The same numbers are used for different messages depending upon the command key which has been depressed.

(32) The meter reader receives the necessary information and enters the required information by selecting keys from written descriptions, reading information in the view screen, selecting appropriate keys in response and entering the appropriate information by either selecting and entering a code corresponding with a predetermined written message, or entering a written message by use of the keypad.

(33) The processor is a computer, and the information entered therein is transferred to the PP&L mainframe computer system by use of a communications interface device.

(34) The use of the processor is taught by a written instruction manual which the meter reader is required to read.

[427]*427(35) The information pertaining to the individuals’ meters and accounts is transmitted to the meter reader by the processor, which communicates printed words in a view screen.

(36) In addition to the customer and account information data which is communicated by the processor, the processor also communicates by printed message the location of the meter, the manner in which access to the meter must be obtained and any known hazards which the meter reader may encounter in approaching the meter.

(37) At each meter location, the meter reader is required to record into the processor the meter reading obtained from the meter and to respond to requests from the processor shown in the view screen pertaining to the information inputted from the reading.

(38) The meter reader must also record into the processor by use of codes determined from menus of preselected messages applicable meter conditions and/or reasons for inability to read meters.

(39) If the menu of predetermined messages does not contain the applicable message, the meter reader must enter a written message by use of the applicable command key and code key for free form message and then print the applicable message into the processor by use of the keyboard.

(40) The meter reader must account for his or her time in route by recording into the processor by use of the command key, a prepared message from a menu of messages or a freeform message printed into the processor by use of the letter keys.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gen. Elec. Corp. v. COM. PA. HUM. R. COM.
365 A.2d 649 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1976)
Shoemaker v. Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission
634 A.2d 772 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Jenks v. Avco Corp.
490 A.2d 912 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1985)
Buckno v. Penn Linen & Uniform Service, Inc.
631 A.2d 674 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Pa. D. & C.4th 422, 1996 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoover-v-pennsylvania-power-light-co-pactcomplnorthu-1996.