The EEOC has filed suit in federal court against a home care provider, alleging it unlawfully discriminated against employees when it changed their work assignments to accommodate client preferences. EEOC v. ACARE HHC d/b/a Four Seasons Licensed Home Health Care, 23-cv-5760 (E.D.N.Y. July 31, 2023).

The suit alleges the home care provider “routinely would accede to racial preferences of patients in making home health aide assignments, including by removing Black and Hispanic home health aides based on clients’ race and national origin-based requests. Those aides would be transferred to a new assignment or, if no other assignment were available, lose their employment completely.” The EEOC contends this conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the affected employees, and injunctive relief to remedy and prevent future discrimination based on employees’ race and national origin.

The issue of accommodating patient or client preferences in making assignments is a familiar one for healthcare providers. We previously reported in 2016 about a case in which a federal district court ruled a respiratory therapist could proceed with her civil rights claims because questions remained about whether her hospital employer intended to honor a patient’s request that he not be treated by black employees. That case arose under 42 U.S.C. §1981, which prohibits discrimination in making and enforcing contracts but, unlike Title VII, does not require evidence of an “adverse employment action.” Thus, the court rejected the hospital’s defense that the plaintiff did not suffer an alteration in terms and conditions of employment, which is currently required under Title VII. The Supreme Court recently accepted for review  a case that challenges the Title VII adverse employment action requirement. Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Mo., No. 22-193. Removing the adverse employment action requirement could make it easier for employees to prevail in cases where healthcare providers change employee assignments based on patients’ racial or national origin preferences.

While healthcare providers strive to accommodate a wide range of patient preferences, they must be careful that such accommodations do not run afoul of applicable state and federal employment discrimination laws. Much has been written in scholarly journals and trade publications regarding strategies for dealing with patients refusing treatment by providers based on race and national origin. One such resource is the American Medical Association’s article, “When Patients Are Prejudiced, Here’s What Physicians Should Do.” This article and the EEOC’s suit against this home care provider are reminders of the importance of training all patient-facing staff on your organization’s commitment to maintaining a work environment free from unlawful discrimination.