headquarters in dallas five days a week in doing so the court ignored lewinsky seven step or period of eight years she had performed her job remotely from her home in illinois and once a week on visits to dallas headquarters not only did she satisfactory printer job but she did so at a high level of performance we believe that eight year history was sufficient to create a privately shoot back as to whether performing her job duties at the corporate headquarters was an essential function of the job the district court ignored this evidence finding that after the merger with us airways mr with these job duties exchanged requiring her physical presence in dallas by this week there was no written job description  as you are referring to after she made the request a reasonable accommodation yes i don't believe there is anything in the record we believe that the district court by disregarding this evidence eric here because american airlines his determination that his entire department should be housed in dallas because he thought all the employees in the park need to communicate on short notice because he thought that a high degree of it in person engaged that was required position was that there's a difference between a preference and what's really essential that's correct your honor that was certainly mr add those preference that well these ploys be located in dallas but mr adler did not make a you've been here for a year or two or sometimes longer can be difficult to manage supervise etc presents challenges but a lot of employers are willing to try it out and i think i understand your argument that look this worked three years quite successfully with ms lewinsky making one weekly trip to dallas but i'm concerned about drawing lines here and in essence punishing good deeds and willingness to to work with employees can you give me any comfort on that score well i think the only comfort i can give you and that your honor is it's a question of that because we have evidence that this be allowed to work from home i think that's relevant evidence like what happens when the duties change we don't know but we don't know because there were no change in duties here there's no evidence in the record of any change in dut they said your honor but i think the question then was you know does that mean that ms lewinsky's precluded from showing evidence of what took place in the last eight years those a jury get to consider that for them to determine whether what the employer is saying is that it's now essential that it be done in dallas does the jury get to consider that for the last eight years she's been writing articles about flight attendants and or what they've done in the community to be put on the website or in their newsletter from her home or whether that's essentially to be done in dallas because also the new employee thinks that there needs to be communication are short notice so i think that's a question for the jury that's what we're saying we're not saying believe the operative facts here yawners is that in december thirteen a major change happened in american airlines american airlines merged with u s airways and american was faced with the daunting task of combining outline of two airlines into one or two airline processes into one this was a unique time in american history and what what happened was a lot of camps within american everybody present but what i don't see in the evidence yet is any actual problems that were experienced with plaintiffs continuing to work in these new challenging circumstances under the prior hotels in the dallas area as well as in the flight academy within the soundless area that mr phillips he was unable to attend so for example when that day needed to be a put set up photographs taken which were part and there is no evidence that she on the few days that she came to dallas there is there is no evidence in the record that she did those types of things are correct so within the post in which an environment there people who can be in this case were productive contributors to continue to do so so the those specific site asked that there is a presumption that the employer is judgement on essential functions that's correct unless the employee is able to provide and operate a language it shouldn't evidence to the contrary i believe that in using the word outweigh the charge was simply applying that presumption and when he did when he did apply the presumption what it did was it looked at the four american airlines witnesses that written job description of a change in written job description of contemporaneous documentation of problems and really even of individual lives consideration as to whether m consideration you had to ask earlier where there was any sort of individual consumers individual as consideration within the records i would point to eight three five four through sixty in the records where  during the one year when mr lindsay functioned after the merger function by working from home and then in dallas one day a week there was nothing in her job description of her duties which they did not dispute that refer to helping out at conferences or any of these other items they never amended her job to include those they never gave her new job description or anything of that nature we just have a question of fact as to what really essentially what were the essentials of her job was it essential that she be in dallas the only final point  is reasonable jury might rule in favor the plaintiffs in finding that it was not essential function of her job that she performed her duties in dallas that was the jury to consider not the district court either way or disregard