What is an Undue Hardship When Considering a Reasonable Accommodation for an Employee’s Disability?

A concept in workplace disability accommodation situations is the idea of “undue hardship” which an employer asserts to avoid having to provide a reasonable accommodation for a disabled employee. California’s Fair Employment & Housing Act (FEHA) and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) both require employers to make a reasonable accommodation for disabled employees. A defense to any reasonable accommodation is that it will cause an “undue hardship” to the employers’ operations or running its business. And like all defenses, the employer has the burden of proving and establishing that the employees’ requested accommodation would be unduly difficult.

The undue hardship defense though is a higher bar than one might assume. It does not mean merely inconvenient or burdensome for the employer. The FEHA definition and its interpretative regulations state that the accommodation must be a “significant” difficulty or expense when considering several factors: (1) the cost of the accommodation, (2) the financial resources, number of employees, and the effect of the accommodation on the employer, (3) the type of operations of the employer, and (4) the relationship between the employer’s facilities.

In a 2008 California Supreme Court decision, Ross v. Ragingwire Telecommunications, the court majority held that an employee could not sue his prospective employer for refusing to allow the employee to use doctor-prescribed medical marijuana while off-duty to treat his long-term back problems. The majority basically found that employers are not obligated to accommodate the use of off-duty drugs.

However, in dissent, the justices noted that a reasonable accommodation includes changing the employer’s policies – such as the no drug use policy. The employer had presented no evidence “to substantiate its claim that accommodating plaintiff’s doctor-recommended use of marijuana would necessarily or likely have substantial adverse effects on its business operations. In the absence of such evidence, there is no basis for the majority to conclude that accommodating plaintiff’s doctor-approved marijuana use would be unreasonable within the meaning of the FEHA.”

Given the high burden to establish the undue hardship defense, most employer’s opt to challenge the reasonableness of the accommodation first. For employees, it’s always a good idea to keep in mind the reasonableness of any requested accommodation.

Read more

wrongful termination attorney

Cheesecake Factory sued for firing worker in retaliation for discrimination complaint

A former Cheesecake Factory employee filed a wrongful termination and retaliation lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court against the popular restaurant chain. She was allegedly fired in retaliation for complaining about a…

READ ARTICLE
disability discrimination lawyer

LAPD officer wins $1 million in disability discrimination lawsuit

Just because an employee has a disability does not mean they must stop working. Under the law, employees with disabilities have a right to keep their jobs and seek damages against employers…

READ ARTICLE
wage violation lawyer

Sushi restaurant ordered to pay almost $30,000 in back wages to cooks

Employers looking to cut corners may sometimes think they can get away with not paying employees all the wages they have earned. Not only does such behavior result in employees missing out…

READ ARTICLE
wage theft lawyer

Senior care facility fined for wage theft after state investigation

Employees in certain industries are required to work overtime or be on call. Under California law, they must be paid for all time spent working beyond their regular hours. Employers are also…

READ ARTICLE
SEEN ON
bloomberg
sfgate
kpix
cnnmoney
marin-ij
dailypost
news10