Employers must consider transferring employees with disabilities so they can be close to medical care, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Sanchez v. Vilsack (No. 11-2118 (10th Cir. Sept. 19, 2012)).
Clarice Sanchez worked as a secretarial employee for the U.S. Forest Service. When she fell at work, she sustained brain damage and lost the left half of her field of vision. Because no doctors in her region were qualified to provide the specialized therapy she needed, she requested a transfer to another city.
The Forest Service declined her request and she filed suit, alleging disability discrimination in violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico dismissed her claims but Sanchez appealed and the 10th Circuit reversed, finding that “transfer accommodations for the purpose of medical treatment or therapy are not unreasonable per se.”
The court based its ruling on 9th Circuit precedent. In Buckingham v. United States (998 F.2d 735, 740 (9th Cir. 1993)) the court considered the case of a post office employee with HIV who requested a transfer from Mississippi to Los Angeles so he could receive medical treatment for his condition.
The court determined that a transfer for medical care was reasonable, disagreeing with the post office’s position that the accommodation was unreasonable because it was unrelated to his ability to perform the essential functions of his job. “[E]mployers are not relieved of their duty to accommodate when employees are already able to perform the essential functions of the job,” the 9th Circuit said. “Qualified handicapped employees who can perform all job functions may require reasonable accommodation to allow them to (a) enjoy the privileges and benefits of employment equal to those enjoyed by non-handicapped employees or (b) pursue therapy or treatment for their handicaps. In other words, an employer is obligated not to interfere, either through action or inaction, with a handicapped employee’s efforts to pursue a normal life.”
Regulations implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act also support this view, the 10th Circuit found. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ADA contemplates not only accommodations that enable an individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of a position, but also those that “enable a[n] . . . employee with a disability to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment that are enjoyed by . . . other similarly-situated employees without disabilities,” the court explained, citing 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(ii),(iii).
A jury will determine whether a transfer is a reasonable accommodation for Sanchez.
For additional information about reasonable accommodations, see Thompson’s employment law library, including the ADA Compliance Guide.