In EEOC v Ford Motor Company, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently recognized that “given the state of modern technology, it is no longer the case that jobs suitable for telecommuting are ‘extraordinary’ or ‘unusual’.”
Simply put: it is more likely than not that allowing an employee to telecommute will be found to be a reasonable accommodation.
This case emphasizes the uphill battle employers need to be prepared to fight if relying on an “undue burden” argument to support its decision to deny a request for an accommodation. Demonstrating an undue burden entails consideration of the following factors: the nature and cost of the accommodation; the financial and personnel resources of the affected facility; the resources of the employer as an entity; and the structure and functions of the employer’s workplace.
When an employer has significant financial and labor resources, winning an “undue burden” argument may be very difficult.
Click here for a more detailed analysis of this case.
- Partner
A member of Plunkett Cooney's Bloomfield Hills office, Courtney L. Nichols serves as the firm's Litigation Department Leader.
Ms. Nichols focuses her litigation practice in the area of employment law, including discrimination ...
Add a comment
Topics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Human Resources
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Wage & Hour
- Minimum Wage
- Employment Discrimination
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Agreement
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- COVID-19
- At Will Employment
- Noncompete Agreements
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Earned Sick Time
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Coronavirus
- Civil Rights
- Contract Employees
- Regulatory Law
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Tax Law
- Title VII
- OSHA Issues
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Retaliation
- Sick Leave
- Federal Trade Commission
- Workplace Harassment
- Unemployment Benefits
- Civil Litigation
- Contracts
- Settlements
- Transgender Issues
- Hostile Work Environment
- Business Risk Management
- Accommodations
- First Amendment
- ERISA
- Workers' Compensation
- Public Education
- Cannabis
- Department of Justice
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- Medicare Issues
- Sexual Harassment
- Garnishments
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- RICO
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Diversity
- Union Organizing & Relations
Recent Updates
- Michigan Legislature Avoids Chaos by Amending Earned Sick Time Act Just Prior to Deadline
- Implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Key Insights for Employers
- Federal Court Throws out DOL’s Attempt to Rewrite White Collar Overtime Rules
- Civil Rights Litigation Filed by Christian Employers Gets New Life Following Federal Appellate Court Ruling
- Michigan Supreme Court Clarifies Minimum Wage Decision
- Judge Strikes Down Federal Ban on Non-compete Agreements
- Michigan Employers Can Legally Resist Union Organizing Efforts
- Michigan Supreme Court Decision Reinstates Previous Versions of Wage Laws
- Union Power in Michigan: Is it Real or Imagined?
- Employers Should act Now to Address Rising DOL Salary Thresholds for Exempt Employees