Federal Employment Accommodations Lawyers

The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) makes it unlawful to discriminate in employment against a qualified individual with a disability.  It applies to most employers with at least 15 employees.

A “disability” under the ADA is a medical impairment – physical, cognitive, emotional / behavioral, or otherwise – that significantly limits a person in a major life activity.  The ADA requires employers to provide reasonable, effective job accommodations to disabled employees who request an accommodation for a disability.  The ADA also restricts the amount of medical information employers can request from disabled employees, and whether and when the employer can ask a disabled employee to take a medical test or have a medical exam.  The ADA also protects employees from discrimination in employment and in their hiring, pay, promotions, or termination on the basis that the employee has a disability, has a history of a disability, is believed by the employer to be disabled (whether correctly or not), or has a personal or family relationship with a disabled person.  Illegal and recreational drug use isn’t protected by the ADA, but rehabilitative treatment is a covered condition for which employers may need to provide reasonable accommodations.

Although an uncomplicated pregnancy, by itself, isn’t a “disability” under the ADA, other state and federal laws also require employers to provide accommodations to pregnant workers, regardless of whether any pregnancy-related conditions are a “disability” or not.  Employees who experience disabling conditions brought on by or resulting from pregnancy may have rights under both disability and pregnancy-related laws.  Schuck Law assists employees with enforcing their rights and pursuing remedies under both these types of laws.

In most cases, employees may have to bring claims through an administrative process with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or its state-level equivalents (Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries (BOLI) and Washington Human Rights Commission (HRC)) before they can bring their ADA claims against their employers in court.  There are strict timelines for filing these kinds of administrative complaints, so employees who believe their rights have been violated shouldn’t delay in seeking legal advice.  However, the administrative process requirement doesn’t apply to claims under Oregon or Washington state anti-discrimination and accommodation laws.  State laws still have time limitations, but they aren’t as short as the time to file an administrative complaint with a state or federal agency.  Employees who haven’t filed an administrative complaint may still be able to bring a lawsuit against their employers under state laws.

Employers cannot fire or retaliate against employees for asking about their rights to ADA accommodations or for requesting an accommodation, and they cannot fire or discriminate against employees due to the employee’s disability.  Employees who have been denied a job accommodation, wrongfully fired or denied a promotion, or who suffered retaliation for asking about or requesting ADA accommodations may have legal claims against the employer for money damages, legal costs and fees, court orders requiring the employer to remedy the unlawful circumstances, and other remedies.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PFWA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers.  It applies to most employers with at least 15 employees.

Under the PWFA, employers must provide reasonable accommodations for the known limitations of an employee due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.  The term “related” is defined broadly and can include things like miscarriage or pregnancy termination, post-partum depression, pregnancy-related health conditions or complications, and lactation.  A “known limitation” means the employee has told the employer about a pregnancy-related limitation or need for accommodation due to pregnancy.  The limitation does not have to be severe and does not have to be a “disability” as defined by the ADA or other disability laws.  Limitations can include routine things like needing time off to attend medical appointments due to pregnancy, or episodic things like a schedule accommodation for intermittent morning sickness, or workplace limitations on tasks that involve lifting or standing, as well as accommodation requests related to more serious pregnancy-related conditions.  The PWFA also restricts the amount of medical information employers can request from pregnant employees to information that confirms the condition and the need for the accommodation in situations where the condition or need are not obvious.

Employers cannot discriminate or retaliate against employees due to the need to provide an accommodation or because the employee requests an accommodation.  Employers also cannot impose a job condition on a pregnant employee as an “accommodation” unless the employer and employee arrive at that accommodation through an interactive process of communicating with each other to identify and implement appropriate accommodations.  That means employers usually can’t just unilaterally force pregnant employees to accept changed job conditions because the employer, and not the employee, thinks the change should be made due to the employee’s pregnancy.

Under the PWFA, employers also cannot force employees to take a leave of absence – whether paid or unpaid – because of the employee’s pregnancy or pregnancy-related conditions unless the employee requests or consents to the leave.  Pregnant employees who do want to take time off are often entitled to time off under other laws that provide employees with job-protected leave time from work, so employers also can’t deny pregnant workers a right to time off that they are entitled to use.  Schuck Law assists employees with enforcing their rights under both these types of laws.

In most cases, employees may have to bring claims through an administrative process with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or its state-level equivalents (Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries (BOLI), Washington Human Rights Commission (HRC), and Washington State Attorney General’s Office) before they can bring their PWFA claims against their employers in court.  There are strict timelines for filing these kinds of administrative complaints, so employees who believe their rights have been violated shouldn’t delay in seeking legal advice.  However, the administrative process requirement doesn’t apply to claims under Oregon or Washington state anti-discrimination and accommodation laws.  State laws still have time limitations, but they aren’t as short as the time to file an administrative complaint with a state or federal agency.  Employees who haven’t filed an administrative complaint may still be able to bring a lawsuit against their employers under state laws.

Employees who have been denied a job accommodation, wrongfully fired or demoted or denied a promotion, forced to take an unwanted leave of absence, or suffered retaliation for asking about or requesting PWFA accommodations may have legal claims against the employer for money damages, legal costs and fees, court orders requiring the employer to remedy the unlawful circumstances, and other remedies.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (Title VII) makes it illegal to discriminate against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.  Title VII applies to most employers with 15 or more employees and covers a broad spectrum of employment decisions including hiring, firing, and other decisions concerning terms and conditions of employment.

Discrimination based on pregnancy is discrimination “on the basis of sex” and is illegal under Title VII.  Discrimination based on pregnancy can include discrimination based on an employee’s current, past, or planned / potential pregnancy; medical conditions related to pregnancy or lactation / breastfeeding; and pregnancy termination or use of birth control.  This can include things like firing or demoting a pregnant employee, refusing to promote or hire pregnant workers or workers who plan to become pregnant, offering lower pay or refusing a raise the employee would otherwise be entitled to, or insulting or intimidating comments about the employee’s pregnancy that affect the employee in the workplace.  It is also illegal for an employer to retaliate against an employee for asking about employee rights under Title VII, or for objecting to employer policies or actions that are illegal under Title VII.

In most cases, employees may have to bring claims through an administrative process with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or its state-level equivalents (Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries (BOLI) and Washington Human Rights Commission (HRC)) before they can bring their Title VII claims against their employers in court.  There are strict timelines for filing these kinds of administrative complaints, so employees who believe their rights have been violated shouldn’t delay in seeking legal advice.  However, the administrative process requirement doesn’t apply to claims under Oregon or Washington state anti-discrimination and accommodation laws.  State laws still have time limitations, but they aren’t as short as the time to file an administrative complaint with a state or federal agency.  Employees who haven’t filed an administrative complaint may still be able to bring a lawsuit against their employers under state laws.

Employees who have been wrongfully fired, demoted, or denied a promotion or raise due to pregnancy, subjected to intolerable insults or intimidation regarding pregnancy, or suffered retaliation for asking about Title VII or objecting to policies or actions that violate Title VII may have legal claims against the employer for money damages, legal costs and fees, court orders requiring the employer to remedy the unlawful circumstances, and other remedies.

Women who are lactating / breastfeeding have certain rights to express breast milk at work, and employers are required to provide a private and appropriate space for them to do so.  That space cannot be a bathroom, and it must be made available to the employee to express breast milk.  Employers must also provide reasonable break time for breast milk expression.  If the employee is not relieved of all duties during this time, the time must be paid.  These federal laws apply broadly and cover most employers and employees for one year after the birth of the employee’s child.

Employees are not necessarily required to file an administrative complaint with a state or federal agency before bringing a claim against an employer in court for violating these laws.  However, the employee may be required to provide a written notice to the employer of some kinds of violations before filing a lawsuit, so employees who believe their rights have been violated shouldn’t delay in seeking legal advice.

Employees who haven’t been provided an adequate space and break time for breast milk expression, who are owed wages because they weren’t fully relieved of work duties during the break, or who suffered retaliation for asking about or requesting an appropriate place and break time for breast milk expression may have legal claims against the employer for money damages, legal costs and fees, court orders requiring the employer to remedy the unlawful circumstances, and other remedies.