Question Presented
[Clearly and concisely state the legal issue or question you are addressing. For example:]
Whether an employer is liable under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for terminating an employee who requested a reasonable accommodation.
Brief Answer
[Provide a concise summary of your conclusion. For example:]
Yes, an employer may be held liable under the ADA if the termination is a direct result of the employee’s request for a reasonable accommodation, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would have caused undue hardship or that the employee was unable to perform the essential functions of their job even with accommodation.
Statement of Facts
[Summarize the relevant facts of the case or scenario. For example:]
The employee, John Doe, was employed as a data analyst and was diagnosed with a chronic back condition. He requested a modified ergonomic workstation as a reasonable accommodation. The employer refused the request, citing budget constraints, and subsequently terminated Mr. Doe, citing performance issues. Mr. Doe had no documented history of performance issues prior to the request.
Discussion
I. Applicable Law
[State the relevant statutes, regulations, or case law.]
The Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.) prohibits employers from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities. Under 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A), employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities unless doing so would impose an undue hardship.
In U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391 (2002), the Supreme Court established that a requested accommodation is considered “reasonable” if it appears feasible or plausible and does not impose undue hardship on the employer. Additionally, in EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 417 F.3d 789 (7th Cir. 2005), the court held that terminating an employee for requesting accommodation may constitute a retaliatory act under the ADA.
II. Application to the Present Facts
[Analyze the facts in light of the legal framework.]
In this case, Mr. Doe’s request for an ergonomic workstation appears to be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. The employer’s refusal to engage in the interactive process or to demonstrate undue hardship likely places them in violation of the statute. Furthermore, the termination following the request for accommodation suggests a potential retaliatory motive, which strengthens Mr. Doe’s claim.
Budget constraints alone are generally insufficient to establish undue hardship unless the employer can provide specific evidence of financial incapacity (see Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 156 F.3d 771 (7th Cir. 1998)).
