by Maggie Spell LeBato
A recent decision by the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals—which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas—offers a reminder about your obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation for an employee with a disability if it will permit her to perform the job. The ruling is also a reminder of what it takes for an employee to request an accommodation.
|
Nurse Fired During Recovery from Surgery
“Monica” worked as a nurse in a medical practice for several years until 2011, when she tore her rotator cuff and had surgery. She was granted 12 weeks of leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to recover. Near the end of her leave, she requested 2 more weeks of leave, but her request was rejected.
Monica’s physician released her to do “light work” requiring limited use of her left arm and clarified that she shouldn’t lift, pull, or push anything weighing more than 10 pounds. After reviewing her limitations, the medical practice fired her because of her inability to perform her job as a result of her injury.
The next day, Monica applied for temporary disability benefits. She and her physician stated on the application forms that her disability was the result of a rotator cuff tear and subsequent surgery and her recovery date was unknown. On the application for disability benefits, Monica represented that she was temporarily totally disabled.
District Court Finds a Contradiction
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued the employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for failing to provide Monica a reasonable accommodation and discharging her while she was recovering from surgery.
In deciding in favor of the employer, the district court focused on one key fact: “The day after her termination, Monica filed for disability benefits and, in doing so, represented that she was temporarily totally disabled.” Because the ADA protects only individuals who, with or without accommodation, can perform their essential job functions, the district court characterized Monica’s disability claim as “problematic.”
The district court further concluded that the EEOC failed to provide a sufficient explanation for the contradiction between Monica’s claim of temporary total disability and the argument that she was “qualified” to work for purposes of the ADA. The EEOC appealed the district court’s ruling to the 5th Circuit.
5th Circuit Disagrees
The 5th Circuit determined that Monica’s claim of temporary total disability on her application for disability benefits wasn’t inconsistent with her claim that she could work if she was given an accommodation. According to the appeals court, the medical practice presented no evidence that called into question her ability to perform her job with a reasonable accommodation.
The 5th Circuit found that the EEOC provided a sufficient explanation to the district court: The fact that Monica could have performed her job with a reasonable accommodation wasn’t inconsistent with her statements on the application for disability benefits because she couldn’t have performed her own job (or other jobs) without an accommodation.
In its defense, the employer made a few creative arguments. First, it contended that Monica was twice offered a reasonable accommodation in the form of clerical work. However, the first offer was made when she was on FMLA leave and unable to return to work. A second offer was allegedly made, but, according to the EEOC, Monica never received it.
The employer also argued that Monica never requested light duty. The 5th Circuit rejected that argument as meritless, pointing to her doctor’s certification clearing her to work with restrictions. The employer also claimed that light duty was inconsistent with the essential functions of her job, but the 5th Circuit found that argument hard to square with its offer to accommodate her by giving her clerical work during her recovery.
Ultimately, Monica’s claim for temporary total disability benefits, made the day after she was discharged because of a disability, didn’t prevent her from contending she was able to work if she was granted a reasonable accommodation. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Vicksburg Healthcare, L.L.C., Case No. 15-60764 (5th Cir., Oct. 12, 2016).
What’s The Lesson for Employers?
First, you are required to provide an accommodation for an employee with a disability unless it will cause your company significant difficulty or expense. The duty to accommodate includes making reasonable adjustments to the work environment to help a person with a disability perform the duties of her job. When requesting an accommodation, the employee doesn’t have to utter any special words. Rather, she simply needs to explain that she is seeking the adjustment in working conditions or duties for a medical condition.
Second, if an employee requests an accommodation for a disability, you have a duty to engage in an interactive process with the employee to evaluate the reasonableness of her request. That process entails discussing the employee’s needs and accommodation options and evaluating the impact any proposed accommodation might have on your business and whether it would eliminate the conflict.
If the proposed accommodation will not pose an undue hardship on your business, you should grant it. However, you are not required to grant an employee’s preferred accommodation if there is another reasonable option that will resolve the problem.
Third, don’t assume an employee’s claim for disability benefits is incompatible with being a “qualified individual” under the ADA. If an employee can’t perform her essential job functions with one, you may still be obligated to engage in the interactive process to identify a reasonable accommodation.
Maggie Spell LeBato is an associate in Jones Walker’s labor relations and employment practice, and a contributor to Louisiana Employment Law Letter. She can be reached in New Orleans at mlebato@joneswalker.com or 504-582-8262.