Skip to main content

Telecommuting is NOT a Reasonable Accommodation, According to Another Court


Doak v. Johnson - District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals


Facts:  Edna Doak ("Doak") worked as an analyst in the Office of Acquisition Resources Management at the United States Coast Guard.  Doak suffered from several debilitating conditions that caused her to miss a significant amount of work, with little to no predictable pattern.  After she exhausted her FMLA leave, Doak requested various accommodations including a late start time of 11 AM (everyone else started between 6 AM and 8 AM) and telecommuting.  Doak's late start time and telecommuting requests were denied on the grounds that Doak's position required her to interact frequently with various co-workers.  The requested accommodations were found to not allow her to perform those job functions. Doak was subsequently terminated from her position due to her ongoing inability to work a regular schedule

Doak brought suit against the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Coast Guard on the grounds that she was discriminated against in violation of the Rehabilitation Act because she had allegedly been unlawfully denied her accommodations and terminated in retaliation for requesting those accommodations.  The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Holding:  The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of the defendants and held that Doak's proposed accommodations would not enable her to perform the essential functions of her job.  Doak's job requirements required she be present during regular work hours and was thus an essential function of the job.  When confronted with this issue, the Court noted that Doak failed to present any evidence to the contrary.

Judgment:  The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's granting of summary judgment in favor of the defendants and found that Doak could not prevail on her Rehabilitation Act claim since the evidence showed her requested accommodations, a late start and telecommuting, would not allow her to perform the essential job functions of her specific position.

The Takeaway:  This is yet another court which has held that telecommuting is not a reasonable accommodation in certain situations.  Earlier this year, the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. Ford Motor Co. reached a similar conclusion:  When an employee's job responsibilities include a requirement that they be present in the office, a request to be allowed to telecommute is often not a reasonable accommodation.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Millett

Date:  August 18, 2015

Opinion:  http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1711036.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more