Reasonable Accommodation
A reasonable accommodation refers to assistance or changes to a workplace or position that enables a disabled employee to perform tasks with ease. Reasonable accommodation follows the requirement by the Americans with Disabilities Act that disabled people should not face discrimination at the workplace, but should receive all the help needed to make them successful in the execution of the functions of their jobs. Under this provision, an employer must provide reasonable accommodations to qualified, disabled employees, with an exception of when such decisions result in undue hardship. ADA promotes such treatment as it enables disabled people to enjoy equal employment opportunities as non-disabled people. Qualified employees are those with experience in the job, skills, and degrees, and that would execute the essential roles of that job, whether there is a reasonable accommodation or not.
Four examples of disabilities that employees of the hotel might have include vision impairment, physical disability, deaf or hard of hearing, and speech and language disability. Accommodations differ according to individual needs as discussed below.
The major modification for the visually impaired or blind employee will be the provision of assistive technology to aid them in accessing computers and other systems installed in the workplace. These technologies will include digital recorders, magnifiers, scanners, refreshable braille embossers and braille displays, and careen reading software. These assistive technologies will work effectively when the websites required by the employee are accessible. As such, message boards, employee portals, and other necessary sites will be made accessible to the employee. If this employee is in the service department, they will be swapped with an employee in front office or other departments that require less movement and that can maximize on the assistive technologies in task performance.
Assuming the disabled employee is on a wheelchair, they will be provided with access ramps at entrances to ensure that the employee can enter and leave the building easily. The ramp incline will observe the ADA guidelines of a slope of 1:16 to 1:20. Steeper rails will have handrails attached to enable the employee to pull themselves up. The employee will also have a designated parking spot next to the entrance of the premises to enhance convenience.
The deaf employee requires email or instant messaging communication and visual aids as opposed to verbal communication. As such, all the other employees working together with them should be trained ion the appropriate use of messaging and email to ensure that there is an effective flow of information. The employee can use the same technique when communicating with customers, whereby customers make their requirements by motioning, as the employee records. When this is challenging, this employee can be allocated a service animal that will assist in the execution of tasks. When such an employee is in charge of receiving bookings, flashing lights will be installed to work jointly with buzzers, doorbells, or incoming telephone calls to ensure that the employee does no miss any of them.
Lastly, assuming that the employee with speech and language disability does not speak at all, communication aids will enable them perform their task easily. The communication aids for this employee will include prerecorded voice, synthesized speech or text, which will be supplemented by touching symbols or pictures and typing words or sentences.
I can decline a reasonable accommodation request in case an employee fails to provide requested documentation from a healthcare professional proving that he/she has a qualifying disability. Besides, I would deny the request when the type of disability is not qualifying, for example, a temporary injury such as a broken arm. Moreover, the request will be declined if the employee can perform their functions without the reasonable accommodation or when the accommodation does not enable them to perform their tasks.
Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship
In Creative Networks, LLC versus a company that cares for disabled people, the company was found to discriminate an individual with a hearing impairment by denying them an accommodation in the form of a sign language interpreter, despite this accommodation not causing an undue hardship on the company (Ezra, 2013). The charging party had requested for the services of a sign interpreter to facilitate the completion of training and pre-employment orientation. The defendant claimed that interpretation services costing above $200 were against policy.
In September 2012, a federal judge ruled in support of the charging party that based on the guidelines provided by the ADA, the defendant failed to accommodate, with no proof of undue hardship, through which a hearing-impaired applicant was denied a job in violation of the law (Ezra, 2013). As such, the case moved to injunctive relief and damages.
Unreasonable Accommodation Resulting in an Undue Hardship
In US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, the United States Supreme Court termed the accommodation as unreasonable and provided a summary judgment for the employer. In this case, the plaintiff, Barnett, sustained a back injury when handling cargo for the defendant, US Airways Inc (Conway, 2013). He shifted to a less strenuous position in the mailroom upon invoking the seniority rights. According to the US Airways seniority system, the maliroom position, similar to the others, was open to seniority-based bidding (LexisNexis, 2020). As such, when the position became open to bidding, two employees in positions senior than Barnett’s, expressed interest in bidding for the job.
Barnett thus requested US Airways for a disability accommodation through the introduction of an exception rule allowing him to maintain the position. US Airways allowed him to keep the job for five months as the matter was put into consideration. However, the company later decided to reject the exception request, leading Barnett to lose his job in 1992 (Creta, 2014). Consequently, Barnett filed a suit under ADA, his major claim being that despite the disability, he could perform the essential roles of the job, and that the job was a reasonable accommodation and US Airways had unlawfully discriminated against him by denying him to keep it.
The company requested for summary judgment, supporting the motion with relevant affidavits, proving that its clearly developed seniority system allowed other employees to acquire the position. The District Court decided that the evidence provided by US Airways on the seniority system called for summary judgment favoring US Airways (Conway, 2013). The District Court was persuaded by the fact that US Airway’s seniority system had been in enforcement for long and guided over 14,000 of the company’s agents. Justice Stephen Breyer on behalf of the majority argued that if the company could prove that such a reassignment conflicted with the requirements of a seniority system, it is then considered unreasonable (Creta, 2014). As such, District Court ruled that US Airways was justified in depending on the policy. The court observed that altering the policy would cause an undue hardship for US Airways Inc. and its nondisabled employees.
However, the Court termed the accommodation as not automatically unreasonable on the basis of its interference with a rule that affects nondisabled employees. As such, the court utilized a multi-step evaluation to check if the accommodation was reasonable according to ADA. Using this evaluation, the Court maintained that it was unreasonable for the reassignment to reverse an existing seniority system (Creta, 2014). The Court thus ruled that a seniority system was necessary as it guides employees’ expectations of equal treatment.
Interactive Process
The interactive process refers to a discussion regarding an employee’s or applicant’s impairment involving the employee or applicant, the employer, and healthcare provider. In the interactive process, the above parties communicate regarding the details of the disability and how it prevents the employee from executing assigned tasks. This discussion forms the basis of compliance with the ADA (SHRM, 2019). The ADA requires the employer to review the accommodation request from the healthcare provider or the employee. There are no requirements for written documentation by the ADA, but it is recommended to maintain written records as evidence.
Moreover, the employer should obtain written permission or medical release from the employee. The healthcare provider cannot disclose the any information regarding the employee’s health or answer questions without their permission. Lastly, the employer should request the employee to provide relevant documentation from his/her rehabilitation professional or healthcare provider on the details of the disability, its duration, severity, its limitations, and the extent to which those limitations prevent the employee from performing work-related tasks (SHRM, 2019).
Jacob v. N.C. Admin Office of the Courts involved Jacobs, who had social anxiety disorder (Kuczynski, 2016). She started getting severe stress and panic attacks a short period after she was assigned a front counter role. She communicated to her senior about the disability and the resulting problems, and noted that she had previously sought treatment and medication for the anxiety. The supervisor advised that Jacobs resumes treatment and also forwarded the discussion to the clerk. Jacobs resumed treatment but still experienced limitations in executing her functions.
After four months, she emailed three of her immediate supervisors requesting that as a result of the disability, she receives training for a different role, and only performs the front counter roles once per week, as opposed to the current four. On the following day, Jacobs had a personal interaction with one of her supervisors, who told her that her request could only be granted by the clerk of the court, who was on holiday (Kuczynski, 2016). Resultantly, Jacobs emailed the clerk and requested her senior to approve of her accrued leave. The supervisor challenged the need for the leave before denying it, even though Jacobs had been allowed to take leave previously without questioning on the need for leave.
Upon her return, the clerk terminated Jacobs ignoring the accommodation request that Jacobs had presented on her desk. The plaintiff thus sued her employer alleging discrimination that went against regulations by ADA. The district court ruling upheld the dismissal, a decision that was reversed by the Fourth Circuit on the basis of failure to apply the interactive process. The Fourth Circuit noted that there was comprehensive evidence that the three supervisors failed to discuss the plaintiff’s plea for a reasonable accommodation (Kuczynski, 2016). Besides, they did not engage Jacobs’ healthcare provider to discuss the disability or its limitations, and instead one of them dismissed her request for leave based on judgment. The court also proved that the supervisors acted in contravention of the interactive process by failing to discuss the plaintiff’s requirements and shift her to another position, since the clerk testified that they had the power to act on her requests.
References
Conway, C. (2013). Ordinarily Reasonable: Using the Supreme Court’s Barnett Analysis to Clarify Preferential Treatment under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Am. UJ Gender Soc. Pol’y & L., 22, 721.
Creta, M. (2014). The accommodation of last resort: The Americans with Disabilities Act and reassignments. BCL Rev., 55, 1693.
Ezra, J. D. A. (2013). EEOC v. Creative Networks, LLC, an Arizona LLC.
Kuczynski, C. (2016). Recent cases under the American with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act. https://www.nhsaa.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=172&dataid=457&FileName=Primex%20Recent%20ADA%20caselaw%20-%20nationwide%202016%20handout.pdf
LexisNexis, (2020). Law school case brief. https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-us-airways-inc-v-barnett
SHRM, (2019). ADA: reasonable accommodation/interactive process. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/exreq/pages/details.aspx?erid=818