Written by Hall Benefit Law on February 10, 2025
Following Amazon’s return-to-work mandate, about a third of American companies plan to issue a similar mandate that requires employees to spend five days per week in the office. However, one Arizona court case illustrates how forced return-to-office (RTO) policies may not be the best strategy.
Bell Road Tire and Auto LLC, d/b/a Big O Tires, implemented a 100% RTO policy for all employees. A disabled employee asked for an accommodation, but the employer allegedly refused to engage in discussions about an accommodation. Instead, Big O enforced the RTO policy and retaliated against the employee.
The employee filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). After an investigation, the EEOC found that the employer’s refusal to discuss a reasonable accommodation with the employee violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Furthermore, Big O failed to keep the employee’s medical records separate from their personnel file, violating the ADA.
Big O reached a settlement with the EEOC, which included payment of $64,500 to the aggrieved employee. Under the terms of the settlement, Big O also agreed to take the following steps:
- Appoint an ADA coordinator to handle all ADA-related issues;
- Update and distribute written ADA policies to all employees;
- Provide additional Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) training for supervisors and HR personnel;
- Establish a priority placement program for employees seeking reassignment;
- Regularly report to the EEOC on ADA and retaliation complaints; and
- Post informational ADA notices in the workplace.
As a result of the Big O decision, HR personnel must be aware of their legal obligations to employees when they embark upon a rigid RTO mandate. HR personnel must seriously consider employees’ requests for reasonable accommodations and engage in an interactive discussion about the requested accommodation and feasible alternatives. Otherwise, employers risk costly lawsuits and bad press.
Furthermore, employees should determine whether remote work is a reasonable accommodation on a case-by-case basis. Courts have refused to dismiss cases where disabled workers sought to work at home as a reasonable accommodation. Therefore, having flexibility in any RTO mandates is key, particularly when the need for reasonable accommodations arises. This more flexible approach is less likely to alienate employees and benefit worker retention.
Employers must also fulfill their legal responsibilities by maintaining employee confidentiality by separating medical and personnel records. Failure to do so can result in penalties under the ADA. Compliance training for all management and HR personnel can also ensure employers follow the law and avoid lawsuits.
