A new ruling from the federal appeals court that covers California demonstrates how you can get hit with a retaliation claim following an employee’s request for a reasonable accommodation—even if it turns out the employee wasn’t disabled. The court also pointed out that travel restrictions don’t qualify as limitations on a major life activity for purposes of federal disability bias law.
Employee Requests Accommodation
Peter Coons, a collection division chief for the Internal Revenue Service, came under investigation for alleged misuse of his office computer. While the investigation was pending, he took sick leave for work-related stress.
Two months later, Coons submitted a letter from his doctor stating he could return to work only with a reasonable accommodation. The doctor said Coons had various stress-related ailments, including abdominal distress, and therefore could return to work only if he wasn’t required to be away from home for extended periods or travel excessively. The IRS didn’t meet with Coons to discuss an accommodation and instead simply assigned him to a position that wouldn’t require much travel.
The following year, Coons was demoted, with a $14,000 pay cut, as a result of the computer misuse investigation.
Lawsuit Filed
Coons sued, claiming the IRS violated the federal Rehabilitation Act— which is similar to the Americans with Disabilities Act and protects federal employees from disability bias—by not engaging in an interactive process with him about his accommodation request. He also claimed he was demoted in retaliation for requesting an accommodation. A district court threw out the claims.
Join us this fall in San Francisco for the California Employment Law Update conference, a 3-day event that will teach you everything you need to know about new laws and regulations, and your compliance obligations, for the year ahead—it’s one-stop shopping at its best.
Travel Isn’t a Major Life Activity
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has now ruled that Coons wasn’t disabled. While Coons’s abdominal distress may have qualified as an impairment, there was no evidence that it significantly limited a major life activity—such as caring for oneself, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, or working—as federal disability bias law requires. Coons argued that the impairment limited his ability to travel. But travel—going places that involve overnight stays—is not a major life activity, said the court. What’s more, Coons only claimed he couldn’t travel extensively, not that he couldn’t travel at all.
Retaliation Claim Fails
The court also explained that an employee who is not disabled can nevertheless assert a claim of retaliation for engaging in the protected activity of requesting an accommodation in good faith. However, the court found no link between Coons’s accommodation request and the demotion. The two events were too far apart in time, with the accommodation request occurring a full year before the demotion, and there was ample evidence that the IRS demoted Coons for misusing the office computer.
Practical Considerations
Even though the employer won on the disability and retaliation claims, this case is a reminder that an accommodation request is a protected activity, even if the employee doesn’t qualify as disabled. So, you could risk a retaliation lawsuit if you take disciplinary or other adverse action against an employee following an accommodation request.