Amazon recently updated its Reasonable Accommodation Policy as to employees seeking disability accommodations to work from home.  

Here is an explanation of their updated policy based on Bloomberg Reports. 

In a nutshell, the policy includes a more rigorous vetting process, multilevel leader review, and month-long return to the office trials. 

As a result, Amazon may wind-up defending more failure-to-accommodate claims while enacting this policy update. Specifically, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations unless doing so would cause an undue hardship. The ADA mandates that employers engage in an interactive process, assessing requests individually in a timely manner. By implementing a more complex approval system, Amazon may be making it harder for employees with disabilities to receive the accommodations that they need, potentially violating the ADA. 

First, the new process requires a complex "multilevel leader review," which could lead to significant delays before employees' requests are approved. This extended waiting period could violate the ADA's requirement to address requests for accommodations in a timely manner, which is seen as a constructive denial of the requested accommodation that makes a failure-to-accommodate lawsuit ripe for adjudication. 

Additionally, the policy is problematic because it applies to both new requests and extensions of existing accommodations. Employees who have already been granted accommodations may now be required to return to the office for month-long trials to assess whether their needs are being met. This one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable for all disabilities, and pushing employees back to the office without considering their specific needs could be seen as a failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of the ADA.

If employees are unable to obtain the accommodations they require and are forced to work in ways that don’t suit their disabilities, they may feel forced to leave the company. In such cases, this could be considered constructive discharge, where the work environment becomes so intolerable that employees feel they have no choice but to quit.

If Amazon's new policy fails to comply with the ADA or similar state and local laws, it could face serious legal consequences. Affected employees should file complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is a condition precedent to bringing an ADA claim. Remember, dependent on location, such a charge must be filed with EEOC in as early as 180 days (some states extend this to 300 days, but federal sector employees only have 45 days to contact an EEO Counselor to get the ball rolling). 

Amazon's actions highlight the need for employers to carefully balance workplace goals with their legal obligations to uphold disability rights under federal, state, and local laws.

In an interview with Scripps News, Attorney Andrew Lieb discussed the court decision finding Alabama's congressional map in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Lieb provided insights on the implications of the ruling, highlighting its significance for voting rights in Alabama and nationwide.

The Impact on Voting Rights:

Lieb emphasized that the ruling is based on the 15th Amendment, an anti-discrimination law. The court found the district boundaries to be discriminatory, allowing only one African-American majority district. This decision reinforces the need to protect voting rights and prevent discrimination.

A Shift in the Supreme Court:

Lieb discussed Chief Justice John Roberts' role in the Supreme Court. Roberts aims to maintain the court's legitimacy by standing against discrimination. This decision represents his attempt to reassert influence and promote a balanced approach within the court.

Attorney Andrew Lieb passionately reflects on the enduring discussions surrounding discrimination laws, acknowledging the difficulty of empathizing with others' experiences. He emphasizes the importance of anti-discrimination laws and encourages a discourse centered around supporting one another. Lieb calls for unity, urging a departure from tribal politics and envisioning a future where discrimination is eradicated.

News 12 interviews Attorney Andrew Lieb on case where teacher made discriminatory comments to student. 

Instructor Showed Prophet Muhammad Images Sues School. School Says Calling It Islamophobic Was Flawed. Legal Analysis With Discrimination Lawyer Andrew Lieb on Scripps News.

Proving Emotional Distress Damages in a Discrimination Case

Discrimination law is top of mind for most attorneys and businesses throughout the country. We all like to discuss the latest news headlines and debate our culture wars to determine who is right and wrong, but in reality, that discussion misses the point. The real question is what is the cost of being wrong. For example, while pecuniary damages (such as back pay and front pay) are known and tangible, have you considered non-pecuniary damages in your case evaluation? In discrimination law, the largest category of damages is emotional distress, which can vary depending on the proof you have and your ability to prove it in court. In this course, Andrew Lieb will teach you how to gather and prove these intangible damages, which will make or break your discrimination case.

Attorneys can register here 

Federal law requires employers to post a notice created by the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), which summarizes the federal laws and explains filing procedures. 

The notice was just updated, and it is called the “Know Your Rights: Workplace Discrimination is Illegal” poster.

It must be placed conspicuously, in a location that is accessible to all employees, including those with disabilities that limit mobility. To ensure that remote employees receive notice, employers should also post the notice on their website.

Violations have consequences! An employer who fails to comply may be fined up to $612 for each separate offense.

Did you know that Title VII employment discrimination cases can happen even if the perpetrator is merely the 6-year-old grandson of the owner?

That's the lesson from Chapman v. Oakland Living Center, which is a case against an assisted living facility where the owner’s 6-year-old grandson repeatedly used the n-word against a black employee.

The problem for the employer was - why didn't anyone stop him? The boy’s grandfather either knew or should have known about the conduct and failed to sufficiently respond. Yes, there was a spanking and an unsuccessful attempted to elicit an apology, but that wasn't enough.

Not wanting to die in a fire, tenants in a Manhattan building for the hearing impaired and deaf have filed a class action lawsuit demanding that the landlords and management companies upgrade items like the fire alarm so it vibrates and stops being useless for tenants who can't hear. Interview with Attorney Andrew Lieb on the lawsuit. 

Click Here For Patch Article Here.