GO TO:


    - INDEX OF CASES

    - FORUMS

    - ARCHIVES

          • NEWS

          • CASES

          • EDITORIALS

  January 12, 2009
  Source:  WorkInjury.com
  ----------------------------

CA/4:   Are Delayed Accommodations an FEHA Violation?

This published opinion's central issue was whether the delay between the employer's final accommodations and the worker's initial requests constituted a "denial of accommodation" within the meaning of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12940, subds. (m) & (n)).

The employee here was originally granted all her requested accommodations (because of a stress-aggravated disability) but the employer would not at first guarantee that they would be permanent.

After lengthy negotiations and proposals that initially were not acceptable to the employer, the employer ultimately agreed to all of the employee's requests on a permanent basis.

The employee nevertheless sued, arguing that the delay leading up to the employer finally agreeing to the employee's accommodation requests amounted to a violation of the FEHA.

A jury returned a verdict in favor of the employer and this opinion affirms that ruling. The appellate court stated that, in the end, the fact that the accommodations were successful lent credence to the employer's position that the delays were just part of the process of coming up with a reasonable solution.

"The real gist of Wilson's complaint is not that she wasn't accommodated, but that it took too long for her supervisors to finally agree to a permanent arrangement...

"She argues that as a matter of law, the County failed to engage in a good faith interactive process with her because it did not commence the interactive process until June 2005, prior to which the County simply 'contrived a circumstance' to justify not engaging in the interactive process-namely, that Wilson's disability was only temporary...

"[T]he record demonstrates the County engaged in a process aimed at trying to accommodate Wilson. Indeed, the success of its process is borne out by the fact that in the end, Wilson got exactly what she wanted-albeit after a series of temporary accommodations. (citations) The record amply supports the jury verdict in the County's favor."

The case is Wilson v. County of Orange.

To read the full opinion,

      PLEASE CLICK HERE.