Offering Practical Guidance to Employers
On July 12, 2017, the EEOC filed suit in the Middle District of North Carolina alleging that an employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing a request to telecommute from an employee with a sensitivity to workplace smells.
In the lawsuit filed against Advanced Home Care, Inc., the EEOC claims that…
A January 9 decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals serves as a vivid reminder that employers must tread with great caution when managing intermittent leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. As the ruling in Wink v. Miller Compressing Company highlights, making abrupt changes in leave accommodations or providing misinformation about leave…
A Coast Guard analyst unable to maintain regular and predictable attendance due to various debilitating conditions was not entitled to her requested accommodations of telecommuting and a later start time, according to a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Doak v. Johnson, Sec’y US Dep’t of Homeland Security…
When I wrote last week that telework was “in the air” because we were anxiously awaiting the en banc Sixth Circuit decision in EEOC v. Ford Motor Company, little did I know that the decision was likely getting a final review before its release, which occurred on Friday.
Common sense trumps the EEOC’s position on…
A few months ago, I posted my fourth and what I then called my “final” blog on the Sixth Circuit’s significant ADA decision in EEOC v. Ford Motor Company. I had never posted four blogs about a decision. But that “final” blog has turned out not to be “final” because on August 29, 2014,…
This, my fourth and last post about the Sixth Circuit’s decision in EEOC v. Ford Motor Company (6th Cir. April 22,2014), deals with the adage, variously attributed to Oscar Wilde, Clare Booth Luce and a host of others, that “no good deed goes unpunished.”
Recall the plaintiff in this case, Harris, a resale buyer, had…
We posted recently about an Eighth Circuit decision in which the court held that rotating shifts was an essential function because “[i]f [plaintiff] were switched to a straight day shift and not required to work the rotating shift, then other Resource Coordinators would have to work more night and weekend shifts.”
Another court has…
