Opinion ID: 202377
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Work Experience of Past Incumbents and Current Incumbents

Text: 46 Mulloy offers no evidence that any electrical engineer at Acushnet has ever performed the job remotely. As the district court stated, Mulloy has no testimony from other former and current employees — and in particular, from the other senior electrical engineer at Acushnet — to substantiate his view of the essential duties of his position. Mulloy, 2005 WL 1528208, at ; see id. (Appellant could have, but did not, depose current claims adjudicators about their duties. (quoting Kvorjak, 259 F.3d at 58) (internal quotation marks omitted)). The absence of such evidence, together with Francis' testimony that she was not aware of any electrical engineer working out of Fairhaven, supports Acushnet's argument that physical presence was an essential function of Mulloy's job. 47 The experience of those who have taken over Mulloy's job functions since his termination also supports the conclusion that the job cannot be performed remotely. It is undisputed that over 70% of Mulloy's former job functions are performed in Ball Plant II by either employees or outside vendors. Based on the work experience of past and current employees, Mulloy has failed to present an adequate basis to challenge the company's contention that his physical presence was an essential function of his job. 48