A recent appeals court opinion illustrates that an employer that acts “reasonably” often will be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that an employer had fulfilled its duties under the ADA by providing an effective accommodation to an employee with a disability, even though it was not the worker’s preferred option. The case is Swanson v. Village of Flossmoor (No. 14-3309 (7th Cir. July 24, 2015)).
Facts of the Case
Mark Swanson worked as police detective for the Village of Flossmoor, Ill. After a stroke, he took Family and Medical Leave Act leave and then, at his doctor’s recommendation, returned to work part time by using accrued vacation to work three-day weeks. He continued to experience side effects, however, and requested light duty. According to Swanson, a supervisor told him the department had no light-duty policy and denied his request.
Shortly thereafter, Swanson had a second stroke and took more FMLA leave. The department notified him when he had exhausted his FMLA leave and reminded him that his paid leave would soon run out. It reminded him that he could request unpaid leave.
While on leave, Swanson suffered a third medical episode and submitted a resignation letter, noting that he was unable to perform the duties of a police detective. He then requested unpaid leave for more than a year so that he could still use the Village’s health insurance plan. The Village granted his request, postponing his resignation. He also applied for and received a disability pension from the Village.
Swanson then filed suit, alleging that the Village failed to accommodate his disability. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, granted summary judgment for the Village, finding that Swanson was unable to demonstrate any ADA violations.
Appeals Court Weighs In
Swanson appealed, arguing that the Village failed to accommodate his disability with a light-duty position. He said that: (1) the Village’s personnel manual lists light duty as an option for employees who are temporarily disabled; and (2) the Village failed to engage in the interactive process of discussing his request.
But Swanson’s reasoning had several shortcomings, the court said.
First, the personnel manual makes clear that the decision to offer an employee light-duty work is at the discretion of the employee’s department. It also expressly states that a request for light duty only will be considered when a doctor’s note states that the employee’s limitations require it. Swanson’s doctor’s note did not recommend light duty, the court said. “[I]t suggested that he work “part-time.” And Swanson did just that.
Second, the ADA does not entitle an employee to his preferred accommodation. “Rather, the law entitles him to a reasonable accommodation in view of his limitations and his employer’s needs. Accordingly, permitting an employee to use paid leave can constitute a reasonable accommodation,” the 7th Circuit said.
Swanson also complained that the employer never offered him light duty or part-time work after his second stroke. But the ADA only requires accommodation for an employee who is qualified to perform the essential functions of his job, the court said. “And Swanson made clear in his resignation letter, in his disability application, and in his deposition testimony that his second stroke rendered him completely unable to resume the responsibilities of a Village police officer.”
Overall, “the Village’s accommodation (and, frankly, its general treatment of Swanson in the wake of his medical issues) seems quite reasonable here,” the 7th Circuit said. In addition to permitting him to work a part-time schedule after his first stroke, it granted his request for unpaid leave to ensure that he would remain on the Village’s health plan, despite receiving his resignation. “Swanson’s briefs leave entirely unclear why in retrospect he deems these accommodations unacceptable,” the court said, affirming the lower court’s summary judgment.
For more on the ADA and reasonable accommodation, visit Thompson’s HR Compliance Expert.