For those businesses out there employing workers, you’ve likely had the complicating factor of employee accommodation come up at some point. If you’re experienced in the accommodation process, you recognize it as a vital, but sometimes frustrating exercise. If you are new to the process, it feels that you’re often facing an uphill battle where nothing is ever good enough and neither side ends up with what they want.
An ideal workplace accommodation should work something like this:
- Employee accommodation request received;
- Employer seeks medical documentation to support existence of employee’s restricting medical condition;
- Medical documentation supporting the request is received;
- Employer meets with employee to discuss possible accommodations for medical condition;
- Employer makes decision on what accommodation to provide employee;
- Employer implements decision;
- Everybody happy.
On this list, steps two through five make up what is called the “interactive process,” and, in more complicated situations, can be repeated several times over until a workable solution is found. The ultimate goal of every accommodation is simply to get the employee the tools he or she needs to perform the essential functions of his or her job.
Aside from being a responsible employer, your willingness to participate in the interactive process will likely save your company big bucks down the road. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) federal regulations state that an interactive process may be required to determine a reasonable accommodation, and courts have upheld this requirement.
In Minnesota, to the contrary, the Supreme Court stated in 2019, in McBee v. Team Indus., Inc., that the Minnesota Human Rights Act did not mandate employers to engage employees in an interactive process to determine whether reasonable accommodations could be made. The statute had required reasonable accommodation, but not a specific interactive process. It stated that “it is an unfair employment practice for an employer… not to make reasonable accommodation to the known disability of a qualified disabled person … unless the employer … can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship….” Minn. Stat. § 363A.08, subd. 6(a).
Legislation, however, was passed in Minnesota just last year to clear up the confusion between the federal and state statutes. The state added to the “reasonable accommodation” portion of the Minnesota Human Rights Act by making the following law: “To determine the appropriate reasonable accommodation the employer agency, or organization shall initiate an informal, interactive process with the individual with a disability in need of the accommodation. The process should identify the limitations resulting from the disability and any potential reasonable accommodations that could overcome those limitations.”
The interactive process is not only the best way to determine what accommodations will serve the employee best in performing their essential functions, it also shows that the employer was willing to work with an employee who was suffering from medical restrictions, and that it tried its best to find a solution to keep an employee working, even if it is ultimately decided that the employee cannot be successful in his or her job following the interactive process.
Employee accommodation can be incredibly complicated if you aren’t receiving the proper advice. If you, or your organization, need assistance in the creation of an accommodation process, or the processing of employee accommodation requests, contact Wiley Reber Law, for experience that works.