A federal appeals court has ruled that full time telework is “rarely a reasonable accommodation,” affirming the dismissal of ADA claims brought by a former IT systems administrator who was denied full-time telework as a reasonable accommodation.
After being diagnosed with Autism, Major Depressive Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder, the plaintiff requested to work from home, but the employer’s client—which controlled the terms of plaintiff’s government contractor position—determined that full-time telework was not in its best interest.
The court held that in-person attendance was an essential function of the job, noting that COVID-era telework policies did not permanently alter job requirements, and that full-time telework “is rarely a reasonable accommodation”.
The court further found that the employer satisfied its ADA obligations by offering a partial telework schedule of two to three days per week, and that plaintiff’s demand for his preferred accommodation did not state a viable claim.
Plaintiff’s discrimination and retaliation claims also failed because he could not establish he was a qualified individual (i.e. an individual who could perform essential functions of the job with or without a reasonable accommodation) or show a causal connection between his accommodation request and his termination.
While a notable ruling, employers should keep in mind that this is the ruling of just one federal appeals court (covering courts in Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana) relating to the federal ADA law.
Other courts outside of the circuit may rule differently and state and local laws involving reasonable accommodations may also be subject to a stricter standard.
Employers should continue to seek advice of counsel when navigating accommodations requests.