Dive Brief:
- The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not obligate employers to make on-the-spot accommodations of an employee's choosing, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled (Brumley v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 18-5453 (6th Cir., Nov. 30, 2018)).
- Melissa Brumley, a UPS employee, injured her back while unloading heavy packages from a truck. She first moved to a light-duty position and then took leave. When she returned to work, her doctor ordered permanent lifting and driving restrictions. Her supervisor sent her home, saying she couldn't perform her usual job with the restrictions but added that she could receive some kind of workplace accommodation. About two weeks' later, UPS sent Brumley paperwork informing her that it was initiating the ADA's interactive process and requesting medical documentation and accommodation suggestions. Once she returned the forms, the employer scheduled a meeting with her for the following month. During the meeting, UPS discussed reassignment as an accommodation, but Brumley said she preferred to return to her doctor and have her restrictions lifted, according to court documents. She did so and returned to her original job, and UPS formally closed its interactive process.
- Brumley sued, alleging that UPS failed to accommodate her disability and owed her back pay for the time she missed. A federal district court granted summary judgment for UPS and Brumley appealed. On appeal, the court upheld the lower court's ruling, saying that an "employer's refusal to provide an accommodation to the position of the employee's choice immediately upon the employee's request is not, in and of itself, a failure to accommodate under the ADA."
Dive Insight:
The ADA requires that employers make reasonable accommodations for employees' disabilities. In such instances, employers are expected to engage in an interactive, good-faith process to find a workable accommodation. These inquiries are highly individualized and accommodations can differ from worker to worker.
An employer can show good faith in many ways, such as meeting with the employee; requesting information about the employee's conditions and limitations; asking the employee what accommodation she suggests; showing some signs of having considered her request and offering and discussing available alternatives if the initial request is too burdensome.
Courts have found employers liable for disability discrimination if they've caused lengthy, unnecessary delays in the interactive process. But delays are considered in context; earlier this year, the D.C. Circuit found that an interactive process that took almost two years to complete did not amount to an accommodation denial. In that case, the employer was able to show that it engaged in the process in good faith and provided a temporary work-from-home accommodation while it ordered special equipment and searched for a vacant position for reassignment. It also kept the employee informed throughout the process, promptly to her requests for information and offered alternative accommodations.
Strong documentation can be key in accommodation cases, experts say, as it allows employers to demonstrate that they didn't cause a breakdown in the interactive process.