Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Jobs and Careers
Reply to "CDC employees losing RA telework"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous]Regan v. Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc. (6th Cir. 2012) Scenario: Employee with narcolepsy had difficulty driving in heavy traffic and asked to avoid a new shift schedule. Ruling: The ADA does not require employers to accommodate commuting problems outside the workplace. The employer was not required to adjust the shift just to make the drive easier. Unrein v. PHC-Fort Morgan, Inc. (10th Cir. 2021) Scenario: Legally blind employee with a 60-mile commute asked to work only when she could secure a ride. She proposed telework on these days as an alternative accommodation, as some job functions could be performed remotely. Ruling: The request was not reasonable. The ADA does not require an employer to accommodate unpredictable attendance stemming from transportation barriers. The employer was also not required to allow partial telework, as the employee did not show she could perform all essential job functions remotely. Schneider v. Giant of Maryland, LLC (D. Md. 2009) Scenario: Employee with epilepsy had difficulty using public transportation and requested schedule changes. Ruling: The employer was not required to provide a different shift solely to ease commuting. Salmon v. Dade County School Board (11th Cir. 1993) Scenario: Teacher with vision impairment wanted transfer to a school closer to home. Ruling: Employer was not obligated to accommodate by shortening the commute. Lyons v. Legal Aid Society (S.D.N.Y. 1993) Scenario: Attorney with a back injury requested reassignment closer to home to shorten subway commute. Ruling: Employer not required to accommodate commute difficulties unrelated to the essential functions of the job. Kimble v. Potter (10th Cir. 2009) Scenario: Postal Service employee with lupus requested a transfer to a facility closer to her home to reduce her commute, which had become difficult due to her condition. Ruling: The ADA does not obligate employers to accommodate commuting difficulties. A transfer intended solely to shorten the commute was not a reasonable accommodation, since it did not relate to the performance of essential job functions. Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc. (4th Cir. 1994) Scenario: Instructor with lupus frequently missed work because her condition and childcare needs made it hard to get to campus. Ruling: Regular, reliable attendance was essential, and the employer was not obligated to accommodate difficulties that arose from commuting or personal circumstances. Carr v. Reno (D.C. Cir. 1995) Scenario: Employee with multiple sclerosis requested transfer to a closer office to reduce her commute. Ruling: Employer was not required to transfer her solely to shorten the commute; commuting is not the employer’s responsibility under the Rehabilitation Act. Gonzagowski v. Widnall (10th Cir. 1996) Scenario: Civilian Air Force employee with a disability requested transfer to a base closer to home to ease commuting. Ruling: The court held that commuting is not a job function and the ADA does not require employers to shorten or otherwise accommodate an employee’s commute. Campbell v. Federal Express Corp. (6th Cir. 1998) Scenario: Employee with epilepsy had difficulty driving to work during certain hours and requested schedule adjustments to avoid the commute at those times. Ruling: Employer was not required to alter shifts solely to accommodate transportation problems outside the workplace. Robinson v. Bodman (D.D.C. 2007) Scenario: DOE employee with a medical condition sought a transfer to a closer office to reduce travel time. Ruling: The employer was not required to provide an accommodation related only to commuting; the ADA/Rehabilitation Act obligates accommodation of essential job functions, not travel.[/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