Reasonable Accommodation

News & Analysis as of

Employers Take Note: The Supreme Court’s Game-Changing Decision in Young v. UPS Requires Review of Pregnancy Accommodation...

Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision in the closely watched case of Young v. UPS, holding that a plaintiff may be able to prove unlawful failure to accommodate a pregnancy-related condition through...more

Supreme Court Strikes Down Employer's Light Duty Policy in Pregnancy Discrimination Case

Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that an employee should have her day in court to determine whether or not United Parcel Service, Inc. violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act when it denied...more

Supreme Court Vacates 4th Circuit in UPS Pregnancy Discrimination Case, But Rejects EEOC's "Most Favored Employee" Argument

Since the case was argued on December 3, 2014, practitioners and clients alike have been anxiously awaiting the Supreme Court's decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. That wait is over as the Supreme Court issued a...more

U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Pregnancy Accommodations

This is one of our "ones to watch for 2015" – Young v. UPS. The legal question certified by the Supreme Court in 2014 was: Whether, and in what circumstances, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act requires an employer that...more

Supreme Court Gives Pregnant Employees a Path Toward Securing Workplace Accommodations

All across America this morning, pregnant employees are screaming out in muted shouts of joy and giving each other belly bumps. Last year, I reported on the EEOC’s recent pregnancy discrimination guidance, which interpreted...more

Pregnancy Not So Favored

Are pregnant employees entitled to workplace accommodations under Title VII? Does it matter whether you offer light duty work to employees injured on the job? The Supreme Court has ruled on Young v. UPS and we still don’t...more

Supreme Court Decides Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12-1226, holding that a pregnant worker who seeks to show disparate treatment under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act may do so under...more

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Decision in Young v. UPS

The United State Supreme Court issued its much anticipated decision in the case of Young v. UPS on March 24, 2015. As of now, Young’s pregnancy discrimination claim remains alive and well....more

U.S. Supreme Court Revives Pregnancy Discrimination Act Claim

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling overturning a lower court’s decision dismissing a woman’s Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”) case and remanded the case for further proceedings. By overturning the...more

Texas Supreme Court Argument Preview - 3/15

On Wednesday, March 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of Texas will hear argument in two cases. No. 13-0745, Greater Houston Partnership v. Paxton - This dispute arises from a request for the records of the Greater Houston...more

U.S. Supreme Court Vacates Young v. UPS Finding that UPS Failed to Accommodate Lifting Restrictions of Pregnant Worker

The U.S. Supreme Court revived Peggy Young’s pregnancy discrimination claim against UPS by vacating a Fourth Circuit decision today by a 6-3 vote. Young worked as an air driver for UPS, which required her to lift up to 70...more

2015 Check-In — Have you updated your policies and documents?

Earlier this year, we posted a checklist outlining key issues and action items for compliance in 2015. With the first quarter coming to a close, we want to remind you of a few important items from that checklist that required...more

The Interactive Process Dance, Part Two: What Happens When the Music Stops?

Part one of this two-part series covered the details of the interactive process in California and discussed a scenario in which the employee fails to respond to the employer’s attempts to communicate on an accommodation to...more

Failure to Comply with Terms of EEOC Consent Order Costs Employer $400,000 in Agency's Costs

Under federal civil rights laws, one major difference between suits brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and private parties involves liability for attorney’s fees. Losing employers must pay the prevailing...more

Employment Appeal Tribunal gives guidance on what constitutes sufficient knowledge of a disability to give rise to a duty to make...

In Donelien v Liberata, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) has held that an employer did not have constructive knowledge of an employee’s disability, even though further steps could have been taken to investigate her...more

Lie Rejecter: Employer's Fraud Defense to Disabled Employee's Claim Fails

It's no secret that in formulating their defense to employment claims, employers often seek to discredit employees' allegations through the employees' own contradictory statements or positions taken. This issue arises most...more

Fourth Circuit Says Social Anxiety Disorder Is ADA Disability

The ADA Amendments Act substantially broadened the definition of protected disabled persons under federal law. Prior to ADAAA, federal courts routinely dismissed disability discrimination claims on the basis that the claimed...more

The Interactive Process Dance, Part One: What Happens When the Music Stops?

Introduction - California employers are not only required to refrain from discriminating against any employee on the basis of disability, but they also have an obligation to provide “reasonable accommodations” for...more

The Impact of the Open Internet Order on Accessibility

The Order does not forbear from enforcing the requirement in Section 225 that telecommunications relay service (TRS) be made available to persons with hearing and speech disabilities, such that they may have access to...more

Employer Found to Have Violated Consent Decree; Ordered to Pay EEOC’s Attorney Fees

The EEOC recently announced that it was awarded nearly half a million dollars in attorney fees after a court found that an employer (the Jewel-Osco grocery store chain) violated a consent decree....more

Do You Have to Guess?

Employers don’t have to guess an employee’s disability and force an accommodation under the ADA. In Walz v. Ameriprise Financial, Inc., No. 14-2495 (8th Cir. March 9, 2015), an employer fired its employee for repeated...more

Utah Legislature Expands Antidiscrimination Laws to Address LGBT and Religious Rights

Last night, the Utah House passed landmark legislation (the "Act") already approved by the Senate that modifies Utah's antidiscrimination and fair housing acts to provide protection for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender...more

Jamison Shaw to Pay $27,500 to Settle EEOC Lawsuit

Federal Agency Charged Employee Was Fired in Retaliation for Complaining About Employer's Refusal to Provide Reasonable Accommodation for Scoliosis - ATLANTA - Jamison Shaw, Inc., a hair salon based in Atlanta, will...more

DC's Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Takes Effect

D.C. employers are now required to accommodate pregnant workers. The District of Columbia’s Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2014 (the Act) took effect on March 3. The new law requires D.C. employers to...more

D.C.’s New Law Protecting Pregnant Workers Is Now Effective

On March 3, 2015, the D.C. Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2014 became effective. The Act provides increased protections for pregnant workers and requires employers to provide reasonable workplace accommodations...more

556 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 23