Category Archives: ADA

July 1, 2025

The Supreme Court “Clarifies” ADA Title I Protections for Retired Workers

Patrick Bernal

By Patrick Bernal and Joseph Robertson

On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Stanley v. City of Sanford, No. 23-997, addressing the scope of protections available to retired workers under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) (ADA), which generally prohibits disability discrimination against employees. In sum, the Court held that the ADA’s antidiscrimination protections do not extend to retired workers who no longer hold or desire a job at the time of the alleged discrimination.

Joseph Robertson

Specifically, the City of Sanford reduced health insurance benefits for its disabled retirees. At that time, the City employed Karyn Stanley as a firefighter, and Ms. Stanley was not disabled. Two years into her retirement, Ms. Stanley filed an ADA employment-discrimination claim against the City. But Ms. Stanley did not specify when she became disabled, so lower courts and the Supreme Court denied Ms. Stanley’s ADA claim, finding that she was not a “qualified individual,” under the meaning of the ADA, and thus not entitled to receive ADA protections. Instead, the Supreme Court ruled that a “qualified individual” must be a current or prospective employee only. Read more >>

October 15, 2024

EEOC Steps Up Enforcement for Pregnant Workers: What Businesses Need to Know About the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

by Leslie Perkins and Greg Saylin

Greg Saylin

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination laws, has been increasingly active in addressing compliance with regulations affecting pregnant workers. This has been particularly evident in fiscal year 2024, as the EEOC has already filed five cases under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), despite the law being in effect for just over a year. State labor commissions, such as the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division, have likewise seen an increase in charges by pregnant workers.

Passed in 2023, the federal PWFA was introduced to combat discrimination and promote workplace equality by requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees and applicants with known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Retaliation against such workers is prohibited.

Some employers have been caught off guard since pregnancy-related leave, without extenuating medical complications, has largely been a function of company parental leave policies, particularly where a worker has not been employed long enough to qualify for other leave. Employers need to take note that they are now required to engage in the interactive process to determine whether an employee is entitled to an accommodation for a pregnancy-related condition – even those not associated with complications – such as normal childbirth and recovery time. Read more >>

October 31, 2023

Breastfeeding Accommodations in the Workplace

Dana Dobbins

By Dana Dobbins

The ability to pump breast milk in the workplace is protected by the FLSA. In 2010, the Break Time for Nursing Mother Act was passed as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and amended the FLSA to include break time and space requirements for nursing to pump breast milk at work. The PUMP Act was signed into law on December 29, 2022, further amending the FLSA to extend the reasonable break time requirement and expand lactation space requirements. The PUMP Act also extended available remedies for violations. Employers should be cognizant of the PUMP Act requirements, as well as any further protections imposed by state and local law.

Break Time Requirements

The PUMP Act requires employers to allow covered employees, for one year after the child’s birth, to take reasonable break time each time such employee has need to express the milk. The PUMP Act is silent as to what is considered a reasonable break time or how many breaks are permitted, reinforcing the drafters’ intent that these issues are to be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the individual needs of the employee. The Department of Labor (DOL) has explained that the frequency and duration of breaks will depend on a variety of factors, including the location of the lactation space, and the steps reasonably necessary to express breast milk, such as pump setup. An employer cannot deny a break for a covered employee who needs to pump. Read more >>

June 26, 2023

Religious Accommodation: SCOTUS Approaching Decision on Title VII ‘Undue Hardship’ Standard

Steven Gutierrez

by Steven Gutierrez

On April 18, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case involving a former U.S. Postal Service (USPS) worker who was denied a religious accommodation to observe his sabbath. The broad implications of a decision that favors the former worker could change the analysis for employers when assessing employee requests for religious accommodations.

Background

Gerald E. Groff is an evangelical Christian who began working at the USPS in 2012. In 2013, the USPS contracted with Amazon to deliver packages on Sundays. Read more >>

July 29, 2021

You Likely Don’t Have to Reimburse Remote Workers for Furniture Expenses

By Mark Wiletsky

Mark Wiletsky

Question: For employees working from home, we currently don’t provide reimbursement for furniture without a doctor’s note stating a need for an ergonomic chair or desk. If we require someone to work from home more than half the time, do we have to purchase an ergonomic chair other than for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) purposes?

Answer: Probably not. You’re correct that the provision of specialized equipment (including, potentially, an ergonomic chair or special desk) can be considered a reasonable accommodation under the ADA, but you likely have no obligation to provide such equipment to employees unless they are disabled within the meaning of the Act and you determine through the interactive process the equipment requested may reasonably accommodate their disabilities by allowing them to
perform the essential job functions.

June 18, 2021

Consider EEOC Guidance When Asking Employees About COVID Vaccine

by Mark Wiletsky

Mark Wiletsky

Question: Can we ask employees if they have received the COVID-19 vaccine?

Answer: The short answer is: Yes. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), you can ask employees if they have received a COVID-19 vaccine. You can also require individuals to provide proof they were vaccinated. Read more >>

June 17, 2021

10th Circuit Decision May Affect Work-From-Home Requests After Pandemic Ends

by Mark Wiletsky

Mark Wiletsky

As COVID-19 vaccinations increase and states ease pandemic-related restrictions, many employers are beginning to plan for employees’ to return to the office. But not all workers may want to return, and some might ask to work remotely because of ongoing concerns about the virus in light of underlying health conditions or simply a fear of becoming infected. It remains to be seen how courts will address the issues under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state law, but the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Colorado employers) recently provided useful guidance in a case addressing a prepandemic accommodation issue.

Facts

Joan Unrein worked at the Colorado Plains Medical Center as a clinical dietitian. At some point, she became legally blind. The hospital accommodated her blindness at work with special magnifying equipment, but her transportation issues were more problematic.

Unrein, who lived about 60 miles from the hospital, couldn’t drive herself to work or secure a ride service or public transportation, so she had to rely on friends and family. As a result, her ability to get to and from work was inconsistent, leading her to request a flexible schedule. Read more >>

December 22, 2020

Update: EEOC Issues Employer Guidance on COVID-19 Vaccinations

By Mark Wiletsky

Mark Wiletsky

In the article, May Employers Mandate COVID-19 Vaccines?, we discussed legal and practical considerations for employers contemplating mandatory COVID-19 vaccines for their employees. We noted that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and other federal and state authorities might be providing updated guidance on this issue.

On December 16, 2020, the EEOC issued new guidance confirming that, although employers may likely mandate COVID-19 vaccines without violating federal anti-discrimination laws (and assuming accommodations are made for employees who cannot take vaccines for qualifying medical or religious reasons), the safest approach—at least for employers outside of certain high-risk fields like the healthcare industry—may be to make vaccinations voluntary, but highly encouraged. Read more >>

April 2, 2020

10th Circuit Upholds Hospital’s Rejection of Applicant Under ADA

Mark Wiletsky

by Mark Wiletsky, Holland & Hart LLP

The rules surrounding medical examinations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) can be tricky. The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming employers) recently analyzed the rules in a case involving an employer’s decision to rescind a job offer based on a postoffer, preemployment medical examination. The lessons learned are helpful for all employers that use or consider medical examinations for applicants or employees.

Facts

Elena Sumler applied for a job as a sonographer with the University of Colorado Hospital Authority. Sonographers use their technical skills to obtain and analyze ultrasound images.

The hospital offered Sumler the position, contingent on a medical examination. As part of the medical exam process, she disclosed that she suffers from fibromyalgia and was taking medications, including two narcotic pain medications. She asserted, however, that she wasn’t disabled and had no restrictions preventing her from performing the essential job functions. Read more >>

August 23, 2018

Asking Employees About Prescription Medicine Use

By Brad Cave

Brad Cave

As an employer, you may be tempted to ask your employees what prescription medications they use and whether their prescription drugs could affect their ability to perform their job. After all, you want to identify any potential safety and performance issues before they arise.

Be aware, however, that employers may ask about prescription medicine only in limited circumstances. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) restricts employers from asking medical questions of applicants and employees. Asking about prescription medications clearly falls into the category of medical-related questions.

Under the ADA, an employer may ask a current employee about prescription medicine only when it’s job-related and consistent with business necessity. That means you may not ask all employees to disclose any medications they take. Instead, you need to determine the job positions for which prescription-related questions would be job-related and consistent with business necessity. Typically, those will be safety-sensitive positions, such as drivers, police officers, and heavy equipment operators. Employees in jobs that don’t face a significant job-related safety risk associated with the side effects of prescription medications should not be asked about their use of those drugs.

Remember that the ADA doesn’t permit employers to ask medical questions of job applicants. Only after a job offer has been extended to a candidate may you inquire about medical information or require the individual to undergo an examination. In addition, be certain to keep all medical information confidential and in files separate from your regular personnel files.