Keeping It Light(ish)

Keeping It Light(ish)

We get it – it’s been a brutal week. Even the weekend feels a little tainted because, congratulations, Tuesday is Tax Day. So, instead of discussing tariffs, stock market crashes, or the latest world-ending prediction, we thought we’d offer you some much-needed respite. Let’s lighten the mood and discuss a recent case on a far lighter topic: post-traumatic stress disorder.

Reasonable(?) Accommodations

Those of you who follow this blog know by now that when it comes to disability accommodations, employees must be able to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without a reasonable accommodation. What this typically boils down to is whether there’s a reasonable accommodation that would allow the employee to do the job – because if there isn’t, no accommodation need be granted. In other words, we’re talking about the “with” part of the “with or without” equation. But you, being the sharp reader that you are, are probably already wondering: “oh wise and witty labor and employment law blogger, what about the ‘without’ part?”  Well, shrewd reader, we’re glad you asked. Let’s dive into this using a recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

The case involves a high school math teacher who, for several years, had PTSD and was granted two 15-minute breaks each day per her doctor’s orders. While the breaks were needed to help keep her symptoms (which included a stress-induced stutter and nightmares so intense they caused her to throw up) under control, the teacher was apparently still able to make it through the school day on the rare occasion when she was unable to take her breaks. Things were going as well as could be in a story involving vomit-inducing nightmares, but things eventually went (more) sideways when a new school administration took over, and a little thing called the COVID pandemic, led to staff shortages and the loss of her second break. When she took one of these breaks anyway, the school reprimanded her. And what did that lead to?

LAWSUITS!!!

Now, the trial judge sided with the school, saying the teacher admitted she could still perform the job without the breaks, and so there was no need for accommodation. The teacher appealed, and U.S. Court of Appeals for the  Second Circuit reversed the decision, stating that the teacher might have a case under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), despite technically being able to perform the essential functions of her job without those breaks. Why? Because, the ADA doesn’t just care about whether someone can push through and get the job done – it’s also concerned with whether a reasonable accommodation could make their work experience safer or more manageable, without triggering unnecessary stress or symptoms.

So, what’s the takeaway here? Generally speaking, we recommend making sure your employees aren’t miserable and being forced to work through disabilities despite experiencing vomit-inducing nightmares. But don’t forget the “without” part of the ADA. If a reasonable accommodation would allow an employee to work in a way that helps manage their symptoms or creates a safer work environment, the ADA might still require it, even if the employee could technically do the job without it. In this case, it wasn’t about “getting through it” – it was about making sure the employee could work without triggering PTSD symptoms.

If you find yourself confused by any of this, don’t worry – we’ve got your back (at least when it comes to the legal obligations; as for the decency part, we’re always happy to lend a non-judgmental, attorney-client-protected ear).

Have a great weekend all. Wishing you a happy and meaningful holiday to all celebrating. And as always, if you’ve got questions, you know we’ve got answers.