Reply to Feds Only Reasonable Accomodations

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Feds Only Reasonable Accomodations"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I’m still waiting on mine. Multiple mental heath conditions that require sleep hygiene and medications not compatible with daily 4 hours spent commuting.[/quote]

Commuting is not an ADA issue. You are not entitled to accommodations to avoid the commute regardless of the condition. [/quote]

Are you an attorney?

Some of these commutes are 2 hours long. Many middle aged and older women suffer from degrees of incontinence. They would have to stop at a bathroom, making their commute even longer. I would argue that the commute itself absolutely is an issue for these people and that remote work is a reasonable accommodation.[/quote]

You can argue whatever you would like.  But the folks in your hypothetical could also wear adult diapers, or simply stop as needed even if it added a bit to the commute.

The PP you were responding to is wrong that telework can’t be an accommodation, but garden variety incontinence issues is not getting you work from home.[/quote]

I never said TW can’t be an accommodation. What I said is that employers are not required to accommodate if the issue is the commute. [/quote]

That’s false, unless in-person physical presence is an essential function of the job.

Where no one has been in-person for half a decade, the hill for proving that is steep,  upwards, and likely to lead to losses in court.[/quote]

You first would have to show a medically inability to commute.

[b]A company does not have to show in office is essential more broadly.  Them simply wanting you in the office is sufficient[/b].[/quote]

This is incorrect. Legal degree from Liberty ? Employer needs to show that the reasonable accommodation causes an unreasonable hardship.  My office has been 100% telework for 5 years and was 60% 2009-2020. So, good luck with that. [/quote]

You need to have a reason for the reasonable accommodation.

I’m a healthy 40 yr old who just had to return to the office after years remote.  I’d love to save the two hours each day commuting and my reviews would show I have excelled remotely and no hardship would befall my employer if I stayed remote.

Despite all that, I am shit out of luck now that my employer has ordered me back.  Doesn’t matter that they couldn’t show a hardship because I can’t show a medical need for accommodation.

Not Liberty, Harvard, actually, btw.[/quote]
but.  isn't that kind of obvious, Harvard?  You need a disability to qualify for a reasonable accommodation under the ADA (or in the case of the feds, the rehab act). [/quote]

Yes, but the PP I was responding to suggested it wasn’t by saying Al she needed to show was that she successfully teleworked and therefore the employer could never show telework would present an unreasonable burden to the employer.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics