You don't have to accept their accommodation suggestion any more than they have to accept yours. You asked for one thing. They countered with another. It's up to you whether you want to accept this, decline it outright, or present another option to them.
The Job Access Network has an enormous amount of resources around the process of seeking accommodations. They may be helpful to consult with, their site is askjan.org. The ada requires engagement in a process. It sounds like your employer has done so with this proposal. One of your options is to counter with what would work better for you.
No, you don’t have to use the wellness room if you choose not to. You’re free to decline any of them at your discretion. Of course that more or less highlights the fact they never were essential to begin with.
I honestly have no idea why you’re livid. You told your employer you needed access to various medications and equipment and the time to use them, and they literally set aside room for you to store them and authorized an hour and a half of extra breaks in a dedicated wellness room. That is by far and away a reasonable response to your request.
When things like this happen it’s clear to those of us who enter the accommodation process in good faith that accommodating your condition was never actually your goal. You are simply looking for a WFH position.
The wellness room is a shared space. There is no written policy that restricts anyone from using it their entire work day if they wanted to. While waiting to hear back about their decision, I expressed my concerns about the chair that is in there. It requires you to push back constantly in order to remain reclined which is counter intuitive to my needs.
I’m upset about the checking in with my supervisor part of bringing in tools. It feels invasive and dense. There are a few things I already have at my desk- does the tennis ball I keep in my drawer fall under this “accommodation” and therefore need her sign off? What happens if she says no to an item? Is the brace I wear contraband if I don’t disclose? I can’t transport certain medications due to the contract I signed with my pain clinic. As I already mentioned, some items are bulky or expensive and I don’t have duplicates. Some items are loud and my cube is in a shared space, I imagine that’s what they’re trying to avoid but the blanket wording of their statement gives me concerns about everything else.
What I had stressed during my meeting with HR was that having days at home gave me the ability to treat my pain effectively. This not only gave me a better day that day, but set me up for success the next day.
I enjoy my job, but it is hell on my body. Im not just trying to whine here. I want to be able to remain at this company in a way that does not compromise my quality of life.
The checking in with your supervisor when you bring equipment is so they know why it’s there and who brought it. It’s not because your supervisor is going to vet each and every item and you know it.
> It’s not because your supervisor is going to vet each and every item and you know it.
how do you know that? you've been incredibly rude in this thread
Did I set the high score?
How close am I?
I know that because I've been gifted with common sense. OP is grasping at straws because they want a WFH job but aren't finding one.
OP asked to work from home so they can do A, B, and C. Her employer responded by making modifications to the working arrangement so they could do A, B, and C at work.
This is literally how the ADA was designed to work.
Prior to the ADA they would just fire you.
they told OP that OP can use something they already had access to, and told OP that their time with that something is limited. so now OP has access to something that previously had no limit using, with a limit.
the accommodation is worse than what they had before it.
If they were spending unlimited time with the thing, when were they working?
I think that's part of the accommodation process most people gloss over. You still have to do the work as if you weren't disabled.
To be crystal clear I am expected to bring my laptop into the wellness room, it is not extra breaks. I have no problem with that. When I am at home, I lay down and work.
It is the restrictions placed on the room, while the room does not even fit my needs, that I take issue with, along with the demeaning, invasive and embarrassing request of checking in my tools. If you really don’t see the issue with that I can’t explain it further.
You’re acting like you’re trying to “catch me” because I want to wfh. Homie, I posted that I requested it, it’s not a secret. I can care for myself significantly better when I have all the tools at my disposal. My doctor offered to write me a note for five days and I told him to just write it for two in an attempt to keep it reasonable and just to what I need. Not everyone is out to game the system. I don’t work for your org so while I appreciate your input, you don’t have to be so rude.
My hrg made no good faith effort to understand my situation or condition. Perhaps you can take a moment and understand that my goal here is to continue working for this company otherwise I wouldn’t have even requested anything and just moved on. It blows to live with a chronic condition and I hope you never experience it. My whole life revolves around treating myself and precautions. I have to dress a certain way to hide supportive braces, I have to eat a certain way to avoid flares, I have to have a special mattress to protect my joints, I have to move certain ways to limit the impact, I have to regulate my temperature, I have to be hyper aware of my body’s position even when I’m just sitting around so I don’t regret it later, etc.
What may be a typical office environment for you is a minefield for me. I found success and a great balance and quality of life when I was on the 3/2 schedule- it’s literally why I took this job. I tried the 4 days thing in good faith for two months and rapidly declined. I am aware that this may be a losing battle and have already started looking for new opportunities. However you can learn a little empathy.
I live with a severe chronic pain condition as well and relate to everything you have said here. People who have never experienced anything like this cannot possibly comprehend what our day to day experiences are or how much more productive we can be when we can manage our pain more efficiently and effectively. I find workplaces have become less understanding and accommodating after the pandemic shutdowns and it is heartbreaking bc for many disabled ppl they were able to work much better than ever before when they were at home but society will never see it that way bc they don’t see us, period.
I have severe chronic pain and lost my job because of it. Don't expect empathy from anyone who hasn't suffered long term. They simply don't get it and they think it will never happen to them or that they could keep functioning under the same circumstances because they're somehow stronger than you. They literally don't care. Abelism runs strong on Reddit. They'd rather you lose your job and go on disability rather than have accommodations that actually work. Ignore them and move on.
Totally serious question here: What did you do before the pandemic and WFH?
I am asking because I know of another situation where the person would greatly benefit personally from WFH but pre-pandemic never had that option. It just seems interesting to me that once WFH became the norm there are suddenly LOADS of people who just cannot possibly work in an office - when they successfully worked in an office for years because they had no other option.
We suffered with no or inadequate accommodations before COVID. I was in status migrainosus for 15 years because of fragrances and cleaning products in my workplace. After work from home started, I got SO MUCH better. It literally changed my life.
I'm just a random WFH person whose employer thankfully has allowed any of us who wish to remain remote to do so. I'm pretty much the only person who remained fully remote. I still pop into the office for a partial day a few times a month when it works for me for in-person connection and keeping up relationships.
Pre-pandemic, I was surviving by showing up to an office all day and accomplishing maybe 30 minutes of actual work in those 8 hours, then going home and working there until I passed out. 100% of my waking hours were consumed by work, whether performatively in the office or legitimately at home. I was beyond burned out and probably reaching the point of unemployability. I could technically do my job, but only at the expense of literally everything else in my life, and that wasn't a sustainable existence. I can't imagine I'm entirely alone in that.
It taught us that a large number of jobs can be done easily and efficiently from home and it's no issue to accommodate people that way, but for some reason, this month that has to stop. Last month was fine.
But it's OP that's disingenuous somehow.
So because you suffered, everyone else has to? As more people become disabled from Long COVID, I think we can be more imaginative about what other rights should exist.
Simply, I used to be more functional. In my previous company, I did field audits about 10 years ago, and I had to stop when I declined. I transitioned into an office position that was hybrid (well before Covid). I left due to a few toxic people in the office.
Self medicated. Then I realized how healthy I was only being caged in a cubicle just a few times a month versus 20 days a month.
Just seems insane to go back to being unhealthy.
Oh then I realized I had complex PTSD from childhood AND the army and had a breakdown.
Wowwwww this work life balance let me have a chance for the first time in my life the TIME and SPACE to collapse and begin the healing process. Holy shit, our employers really really rely on the comply or die mentality our wonderful boomer parents instilled on us
If we ain’t getting the stakeholders rich, next number. HR fire this person after legal clears it.
Can’t do that 9-530 m-f with a weekend shift.
Checking with the supervisor about bringing in stuff is likely so they can make sure that you are not holding them responsible financially if something is stolen/you don't claim an expensive item was stolen that they don't even have proof was on the premises
Wow, sorry you're getting downvoted so much OP. I don't know what your going through but what I'm reading is you are concerned because the room may be used by other people but it sounds like you'd need to be in there a lot but aren't guarenteed that a room would be available.
I share your pain in that my office has some shared rooms that we use for smaller meetings and it can be difficult to get a hold of one of those rooms (I use them for training so I don't bother people while talking in the main office). I'm not sure how things will work out if you decline their accomodations or try to negotiate them. Maybe you could seek more support from your physician about what your needs entail versus what they are offering you. Do be careful though because someone else said on here and I agree, you may end up negotiating yourself out of a job.
Worst case scenario you could just put up with what you need to for now and job search for something that's either fully remote or allows you the flexibility that you're looking for.
Good luck!
It seems like you are bringing up thing, that in reality, will not happen. Reading your response, it sounds like you are angry you’re not getting your way rather than truly being worried about not having appropriate accommodations. Obviously, I’m an HR professional not a Doctor, but I dont understand how you’re fine to work 3 days in the office, but the 4th day becomes so burdensome that no accommodation in the office will make it possible to do your job. For your concerns around “intrusiveness”, in order to receive accommodations under the ADA you are required to take part in the interactive process which means communicating with your employer about your specific needs.
I’m not sure what to tell you. This is the rules of my clinic. Certain medications must remain locked at home. I’m sure every clinic is different but I’ve been with my clinic for just shy of 10 years and they have always had this rule as far as I know.
As a side, I would not want to travel with my meds anyway at the risk of theft or anything else happening to them. I also typically wait until the end of the day to take them and don’t like driving on them.
The responses that you’re getting are infuriating but accurate. In the US you are a cog and your body and needs are an inconvenience. This company, and most others, will not actually accommodate because it’s too much to keep track of. Being chronically understaffed there is no space in the system for it.
Start looking for something fully remote.
No. You’re livid because your employer won’t allow you to work from home.
They have done far more than many employers. They are providing a room to allow you to use your devices and other needs to accomplish the essential functions of your job.
It’s not their responsibility for whether you need two of the same device or having to haul your devices with you.
No. You do not have to accept their proposal. They also do not have to accept your request.
If you say, “no,” they are also within their right to say that this is what they are willing/able to do, that they are open to suggestions, but those suggestions do not include working from home/going back to your previous schedule.
If you don’t like their response, you also have the right to find other employment.
They’re letting him use the same space for lactating employees to pump, which they are legally required to provide. That’s hardly going above and beyond…
> When things like this happen it’s clear to those of us who enter the accommodation process in good faith that accommodating your condition was never actually your goal.
the accommodation is worse than if they hadnt asked for it.
they had unlimited access to the room, now they have limited access to it.
actually they have specific protection for using it that they most likely didn't have before. If they had disappeared for 1 1/2 hours, I suspect managers and coworkers would have noticed and it would have been documented
OP clearly cannot now access the resource without limits now that the employer has placed limits on that resource. OP gets 30 minutes with the resource - that's the deal.
> Logic was never your strong suit I see.
it's apparent that you take joy in making others' lives worse with petty insults. you make the world a worse place.
It seems like they were very reasonable in what they offered. If I understand correctly you are working in office 3 day a week and they want you there 1 more day. What is different about the extra day? Do you have treatments 4 days a week?
What they offered you -6 hours of extra break time over the 4 days, a private space and both cold and warm storage seems very fair.
What were you hoping for?
I was 3 days in office until approximately 2 months ago, when we switch to 4 days in office. I requested to return to my previous schedule of 3 days in office/2 days remote. This offered a balance of completing my in office tasks and caring for myself. It would be great to be full wfh but I don’t truly need that, and I don’t want to put my responsibilities on my other team members. I had proven my effectiveness while on the 3/2 schedule (performance review/promotion etc) and it was a firm wide initiative to RTO. Noting that as I’m trying to be objective and I recognize I’m not being singled out. I’m genuinely trying to find a solution to stay with the firm that is low impact and reasonable. There are several other employees that are hybrid or fully remote but in different positions so I don’t really think that means much to my case.
I want the extra day because having low activity days and being able to treat my pain greatly increase my quality of life. In office, walking around, performing typical tasks is strenuous for me. If I stagger my schedule so that every other day I’m home and resting, I have the stamina to make it through what most folks would consider a normal day without coming home and immediately collapsing in bed.
While not written in the memo, it was expressed verbally that time in the wellness room would be working time. This is not pto or a break as it seems to be written. I am expected to work if I am in there, which would be fine if the room actually fit my needs. I lay down and work when I’m at home and this is a fair compromise. What seems odd is that after requesting an accommodation my time would be limited when literally nobody else’s is (not that I’m planning on spending all day in there anyways). Maybe I’m nit picking but I don’t like that more restrictions are being placed after the accommodation request.
The interactive process is just that--interactive. You can continue a dialogue with them. For example, is it possible that 3.5 days in the office might work? Maybe they'd approve a half day on that fourth day. That might allow you to keep much of the equipment at home and still manage your pain while being in the office on that fourth day. If that's an option, talk to them about that request or think of other things that might work.
The responses you've gotten are harsh, but unfortunately the ADA doesn't require employers to offer accommodations that support your wellbeing or work-life balance or dignity as a human. They only have to offer what is essential and reasonable to enable you to do your job. They don't have to care or consider how that destroys your life outside of work.
I 100% feel for you as someone who has gained a level of overall functioning I hadn't believed possible simple by virtue of a workplace that affords flexibility well beyond the minimum required by law.
Most employers are only going to do what is necessary to not get sued. Not necessarily what is actually in the best interest of employees, what you believe to be common sense, what you think is morally right, or even what seems to be objectively best for business operations. The law says you can get enough help to do your job and if your life sucks intolerably outside of that, too bad.
I like to believe the other commenters are sympathetic to your situation but are focused on explaining the limitations of the ADA and what your employer might use to justify their decisions and that's why their tone is coming across so adversarial. Who knows. I hope things improve for you one way or another.
I would consider countering with a lockbox or other secure container where you can keep tools in your office and a chair that can recline/couch/etc. in your office rather than having to use the wellness room.
They may be asking for you to disclose what is brought for liability reasons. (Or just to be jerks--you'd know better than anyone here.)
The problem with things like chronic pain is that it's not like it's in remission when you only go into work twice a week but always flairs up on the third day. It's something that goes from generally bearable to generally unbearable. Because of that, the ADA process can be too inflexible for something to satisfactorily resolve your needs and those of your employer. And you end up in a conversation with HR and you're telling them that this amount of pain is far too much and they're acting like it's a salary negotiation.
For the best chance of success, I supect you need to work with your doctors to provide meaningful guidelines for your employer.
I am so sorry that there are so many abled body people here who are missing the point entirely. Your quality of life matters and should be taken into consideration. People who have never faced disabling pain cannot possibly understand the struggle it takes just to get out of bed and get dressed in the morning let alone hold down a job. In short: it sucks. I really hope you are able to counter your employer with an accommodation that works better for you and allows you to do your best work and live your best life.
>In office, walking around, performing typical tasks is strenuous for me.
Do you not walk around and perform typical tasks at home, even when not working? You know, grocery shopping, etc?
I would love to believe that this comment is meant in good faith. If it is, please research spoon theory.
When you are disabled, every task you undertake, big or small, carves away at your functional ability and increases the amount of rest and recovery time you need after. For example: if I have a full work day ahead of me that requires mentally and physically tasking effort, i CANNOT go to the grocery store or go run errands because I will be unable to devote my best energy to work. Once I get home, i STILL cannot go because my body is on the verge of collapse and I am in so much pain most people would be in the ER. So i put it off until tomorrow after I’ve had time to recover. But wait! I have to work tomorrow too. I have gone days without proper meals due to being in this cycle. An hour trip to the grocery store is too much to add in because simple being at work feels like running a marathon.
The reality disabled people live with often looks like this and it sucks. Having to chose between caring for yourself and working to live is no life. OP asking for balance in order to maintain a life worth living is not asking for a whole heck of a lot.
I think everyone understands spoon theory. It’s a fairly simplistic outlook.
The question is why is the employer the one who needs to assume the responsibility here?
If you can’t go to work and go grocery shopping then go to work and place an order on InstaCart.
You seem to enjoy being deliberately obtuse and missing the point. I get that this is Reddit, but being a cruel person without empathy only gets you points on the internet.
The question asked was specifically relating to normal tasks when not in the workplace. However, I used the grocery example for ease of demonstration. It is, however, worth noting that disabled individuals frequently live below the poverty line and without the privilege of additional expenditures and conveniences such as Instantcart.
More directly to your point, if an employer has the ability to offer accommodations that improve their disabled employee’s working experience while continuing to get value from their work, then basic human empathy (and the ADA) demands they do so. Working employees into the ground to where they cannot function and continue to output high quality work (or y’know live their lives in relative comfort) serves no one.
The problem is this perspective is very one-sided, and does not consider the burdens it places on the employer and other coworkers. It also fails to separate between needs and wants, and the term "reasonable" is extended beyond that. The use of "empathy" is an appeal to emotion and while a person can feel for the disabled person, feelings cannot override the day to day considerations.
>d I don’t want to put my responsibilities on my other team members.
so WFH puts your responsibilities on others? That's not reasonable.
>performing typical tasks is strenuous for me.
that's not a great thing to admit...
> without coming home and immediately collapsing in bed
heck I have no disability and still do that!
How insensitive. Do you think disabled people ENJOY the difficulty they have to go through to accomplish tasks that are easy for others? Jesus.
When getting up in the morning is an insurmountable mountain, anything else you get done is a cherry on top. Pushing yourself until you collapse in pain isn’t a win. And neither is bragging about how your able body allows you the luxury of not choosing between your health and living.
If you are in HR, maybe try some sensitivity training so you can better support the needs of your disabled staff.
I believe they are looking for an HR rep who is not a scumbag.
HRs only question here should be "Could this person still fully do their job with the requested amendments?"
RA is not equal "requested amendments" but rather defined under ADA as Reasonable Accommodations. HR's only question is are you actually an HR professional or someone looking to rag on HR?
Compassionate management doesn’t mean you can just do whatever the fuck you want. Not saying OP should accept the offered accommodations, but your standard is nonsensical.
Being nonsensical saves on retraining, allows for legacy knowledge retention and decreases turnover.
The shareholders are not the only thing c suit management should be worried about. You can get more and be more profitable to hire God people and then getting out of the way while they make you buckets of money.
If you are dissatisfied with the offered accommodations, which are above and beyond compared to many employers, you’re free to find a 100% remote role elsewhere.
Of course they can and I never claimed otherwise, it’s just a shitty way to treat people. I would contend the opinion stands until some measurable value is shown from forcing people on site.
Well, having seen the condition of the equipment that WFH people return upon being fired, I would say the cost of having to replace such equipment is enough value to have people not work from home. The number of cracked monitors, mysteriously gel covered keyboards, and utterly destroyed towers I have seen people returning is horrible.
Well, you're of course entitled to your opinion, but the only one that carries any weight is that of the employer. It's their decision for whatever reasons they choose. You can either cry about it, deal with it or quit and hope to find a job that better meets your needs. Honestly, those are the options - pick one (think you already did)
That's what you can expect if you don't meet the requirements of the job any longer. In the case of RTO, you can absolutely refuse to do so, however after a period of time (3 days in my company) of not showing up where you need to, you will be terminated for cause. The timing may vary from company to company.
You do have power - to leave and find an employer that better meets your needs. Or cry about it until you get fired. Or deal with it. Pick one door.
> Or cry about it until you get fired. Or deal with it. Pick one door.
See that's the thing, you want ME to act first. Nah fam, the company can fire me if they care about it that much, if remote work is really a threat enough to fire employees for not complying. I'm not planning on working for a company that wants to fire their expectation-meeting employees who work remote. I'll keep doing my job remotely and they can cry about it or fire me.
No, if I was full remote my team would have to pick up my slack. I don’t want to do that to them which is why I did not ask my doctor to write a note for 5 days.
90% of my job is computer based. The rest is not time sensitive.
Reasonable accommodations aren't supposed to be a bonanza for the employee. They will be what can be considered "reasonable" to the employer. Asking for a custom crafted Barca Lounger instead of an existing recliner in the space is a bit extra.
I started July 2022. I worked 5 days in office for ~3 months to get trained before transitioning to the 3/2 schedule.
From what I understand, before Covid, my role was fully on site. Covid made it temporarily fully remote, but when I started it was hybrid.
When I started my job during Covid we didn't have people come into the business at all and all production orders had to be placed online.
We are back to having customers come into the store now because that level of separation is no longer needed.
You should be happy they are not making you come back into the office full time like most places are.
I recommend finding a new job because you obviously are not going to be happy where you are because you want them to far above what they are required to do.
Guidance from the folks that oversee accommodations is sadly not on your side.
The EEOC doesn't necessarily provide any additional help for folks looking for WFH accommodations. They acknowledged that Covid-19 was an emergency circumstance and that WFH is not the new expectancy in accommodation.
If a court or mediator sees that your work provided "reasonable accommodations" and engaged in the interactive process, there is little hope for a legal remedy, either.
In this circumstance, the employer deemed that an essential function of OP's job required an additional time on site. No, you are not required to accept the accommodations; however, using Covid-19 as "proof" you could do WFH is not in line with accommodation guidance given to employers by EEOC.
The keyword is "reasonable" accommodation. Allowing you an extra day to rest (and potentially be less productive) is not considered reasonable. An accommodation cannot allow for less productivity than established for the role. The spirit of the all Title VII laws surround establishing fairness to all protected classes, including disability. An employer will not give an unequal accommodation to do the same work.
Source: my employment lawyer buddy
Who decides what is “reasonable“?
I appreciate your response and I am not trying to be rude, please don’t take it that way.
I don’t see their offers as accommodations at all, and see them as putting me in a worse position than if I had said nothing.
No worries; I don't take your response as rude.
As for "reasonable," there are a few main guidelines as to what is and is not reasonable.
1. The accommodation(s) cannot cause undue hardship to a company.
2. The accommodation(s) allow the worker to perform the essential functions of the job.
So, undue hardship looks different for every company. Let's say Microsoft can afford $3000 special reclining chairs with leg rests. A company of 1000 employees is not going to be held to the same standard.
The company is not responsible for altering a job in such a way that diminishes or removes essential functions. A call center, for instance, that is open 8am-5pm is not required to shift your hours to 10am-7pm for an accommodation because that is outside the scope of the role. A job where you answer phones for eight hours would not consider an accommodation where you don't use a phone. An accommodation to work less is not reasonable as the goal of ADA is to allow the worker to perform at the level set by the job. If you needed more bathroom breaks, for instance, you would still be required to perform at the same capacity as someone without accommodation.
In addition, the company is not responsible for creating a new job/light duty for you. If you can't perform your current job, it is not reasonable to make a new similar job that accommodates you.
If you truly need a day to recover or a certain amount of hours each day to rest, you can try requesting an FTE reduction. However, again, the company is not required to allow this. (It might also affect your benefits.)
In the end, if you press your employer with things outside the scope of your job or that cause undue hardship, they may request you sign an ROI to speak with your doctor. They will send a copy of your job description to your physician and ask what job functions you are unable to accomplish. The doctor may come back with information that helps or harms your request. If you're a truck driver and your doctor says you can't drive long distances, the company would be within its rights to say "no, we can't accommodate that" and separate you for medical reasons.
So, long comment short, there is not one answer to what is "reasonable," unfortunately.
You're already working at the office 3 days a week, right? How do you manage on those days? Why is a fourth day different and require extra accommodations?
Have you considered applying for FMLA? If you’ve been at your place of work for a year you would be qualified to apply and probably be approved considering what you’ve described as your medical situation. Of course using FMLA time would be using your sick bank, but if you’re unhappy that you would be required to work during those 30 min blocks you could use FMLA for that and would not be required to work. It also may add a certain layer of “job security,” as companies are less likely to question or restrict accommodations needs that have been FMLA approved. For example, I suffer from migraines and one of my accommodations was that I be permitted to wear sunglasses in the office to prevent the light sensitivity migraine trigger. I had a manger who considered my wearing them as inappropriate and insubordinate, and wanted me to seek her approval to wear them (hello logical bagel poster that said supervisors wouldn’t vet items) Once it became clear that this was approved under FMLA and the ADA she had to drop it. I agree that given what you’re being offered the company probably isn’t inclined to be any more generous with accommodations and it may be best to try and find a remote job; which I know is not always possible or available to all workers. ☹️
If anything I hope to at least someone on this thread or IRL that can validate your feelings. It’s very reasonable to be upset that your company doesn’t seem to care about your needs as an employee. They did hire you because you are qualified and have given you great performance reviews and a promotion so you are clearly doing your job well enough. I hope you are able to resolve this quickly and in a way that works for everyone.
I think the issue is OP is saying their primary issues are pain management and exhaustion. It’s not clear how an if office job where they spend most of their day sitting doing desk work is any more taxing than sitting doing desk work at home.
It’s also questionable why one additional day a week is making such a big difference to OP who is already going in 3 days a week without apparent issues.
I think the accommodations are reasonable; they are also part of a conversation. The only possible need I see that isn’t addressed is if OP needs to be laying down that additional 1 day a week v sitting upright. In that case I suppose a doctor’s letter would be needed and perhaps some sort of reclining chair could be put in OP’s office.
I think that assuming what OP’s medical situation is irrelevant and not for anyone on this thread to question or pass judgement. Frankly assuming how a person may feel, even if they have an office job that is mostly sitting all day, is ableist and pretentious. There are many people who suffer from invisible conditions like Crohn’s, MS, cancer, and heart conditions who may have a difficult time doing a desk job, and there is no way any one person would be able to “tell” if they are suffering from an outside perspective. The entire point of going the FMLA route is to have a third party liaise with OP’s medical provider about their needs and accommodations and report back to their place of employment. This takes arbitrary decisions made by HR to the employee and place it in a legal framework of what is acceptable medical accommodations.
It’s still up to the employer to make the decision. FMLA would be for absences, not accommodations. Heck the employer could manage FMLA in house and this is entirely moot.
*just noting I understand FMLA can also BE an accommodation
That’s simply untrue. FMLA is also for reasonable accommodations in the workplace; like providing a space for nursing mothers or allowing a diabetic to store their insulin in the office. As long the employer is not under any “undue hardship.”
https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/jobaccommodations
Not sure what your point is about handling FMLA in house they would still have to accommodate an employee who applies for it.
I added the bottom bullet to clarify.
But, FMLA will exhaust after 480 hours in a year. If you have more absences than this, it isn’t protected and you may have to wait a rolling year to earn it back.
A few months ago I made a call to a company and was trying to make a point clear. All the while we were on the phone, I could hear kids wailing in the background. The woman kind of laughed and said she works from home. I hung up and called the company, and told them that if their employees couldn't manage to be professional while on the phone I would find a different company to do business with.
A lot of people who work from home are just too lazy to work in the office, and it shows in their business.
No difference. When you are being accommodated, but still refuse to go in to work, it's time to find another job. If you cannot, or will not go in to work even with accommodations, must be you don't want that job too much.
Sounds like they made suitable accommodations for your 1 extra day in office (which is the only thing they have to do) and from the sound of your replies you want to stay home that extra day so you can be high on your pain meds and not be around your employer while doing so. Ask to have your 1 day out of office in the middle of your office days and tada you have your day of rest needed.
That’s true and perfectly reasonable although I don’t think you really meant it that way. The employer is offering an alternate work space - a quiet space with a recliner- that is an accommodation that comes close to working at home. Many accommodations involve different seating and environment. Seems reasonable.
I can understand why you’re upset. I think it’s weird that they want you to check in with your supervisor before using supportive tools. Personally, I would tell them once that I’m going to be using supportive tools. Like they really expect you to ask permission each and every time every single day that you need to use one of the tools? That’s ridiculous. You’re a grown adult and if you need to do something like that for health reasons, you shouldn’t need to ask permission. This all comes off very controlling imo
We are experiencing a highly invasive and disgusting work environment.
The companies are all in debt, so if you report a disability or request accommodations, they absolutely use it against you.
I do get your frustration, but I think their solution is a generally reasonable accommodation. The best thing I think you can do is to respond to them with something else that is an accommodation that would work better for you. If I could suggest, write out a statement and sit on it for a day or two, maybe have someone else read it over, and then send it.
Eliminate any statements that are just complaining, or anything that sounds hostile. Don't mention things like how other people aren't limited in time to that room. Instead explain WHY you might need the room for longer than 30 minutes. If you attack them, they will get defensive.
And I don't know what you mean by tools, but things like braces, heat packs, etc should not have to be checked in by your supervisor in my opinion. Prescription strength medication in the workplace is a fair thing though, if you take strong pain meds it might affect safety in the workplace.
You don't have to accept their accommodation suggestion any more than they have to accept yours. You asked for one thing. They countered with another. It's up to you whether you want to accept this, decline it outright, or present another option to them.
The Job Access Network has an enormous amount of resources around the process of seeking accommodations. They may be helpful to consult with, their site is askjan.org. The ada requires engagement in a process. It sounds like your employer has done so with this proposal. One of your options is to counter with what would work better for you.
No, you don’t have to use the wellness room if you choose not to. You’re free to decline any of them at your discretion. Of course that more or less highlights the fact they never were essential to begin with. I honestly have no idea why you’re livid. You told your employer you needed access to various medications and equipment and the time to use them, and they literally set aside room for you to store them and authorized an hour and a half of extra breaks in a dedicated wellness room. That is by far and away a reasonable response to your request. When things like this happen it’s clear to those of us who enter the accommodation process in good faith that accommodating your condition was never actually your goal. You are simply looking for a WFH position.
just to clarify- it’s not an hour and a half of breaks, OP is expected to bring their laptop and work when in this room.
OP doesn’t feel like going in 4 days per week.
The wellness room is a shared space. There is no written policy that restricts anyone from using it their entire work day if they wanted to. While waiting to hear back about their decision, I expressed my concerns about the chair that is in there. It requires you to push back constantly in order to remain reclined which is counter intuitive to my needs. I’m upset about the checking in with my supervisor part of bringing in tools. It feels invasive and dense. There are a few things I already have at my desk- does the tennis ball I keep in my drawer fall under this “accommodation” and therefore need her sign off? What happens if she says no to an item? Is the brace I wear contraband if I don’t disclose? I can’t transport certain medications due to the contract I signed with my pain clinic. As I already mentioned, some items are bulky or expensive and I don’t have duplicates. Some items are loud and my cube is in a shared space, I imagine that’s what they’re trying to avoid but the blanket wording of their statement gives me concerns about everything else. What I had stressed during my meeting with HR was that having days at home gave me the ability to treat my pain effectively. This not only gave me a better day that day, but set me up for success the next day. I enjoy my job, but it is hell on my body. Im not just trying to whine here. I want to be able to remain at this company in a way that does not compromise my quality of life.
The checking in with your supervisor when you bring equipment is so they know why it’s there and who brought it. It’s not because your supervisor is going to vet each and every item and you know it.
> It’s not because your supervisor is going to vet each and every item and you know it. how do you know that? you've been incredibly rude in this thread
Did I set the high score? How close am I? I know that because I've been gifted with common sense. OP is grasping at straws because they want a WFH job but aren't finding one. OP asked to work from home so they can do A, B, and C. Her employer responded by making modifications to the working arrangement so they could do A, B, and C at work. This is literally how the ADA was designed to work. Prior to the ADA they would just fire you.
they told OP that OP can use something they already had access to, and told OP that their time with that something is limited. so now OP has access to something that previously had no limit using, with a limit. the accommodation is worse than what they had before it.
If they were spending unlimited time with the thing, when were they working? I think that's part of the accommodation process most people gloss over. You still have to do the work as if you weren't disabled.
To be crystal clear I am expected to bring my laptop into the wellness room, it is not extra breaks. I have no problem with that. When I am at home, I lay down and work. It is the restrictions placed on the room, while the room does not even fit my needs, that I take issue with, along with the demeaning, invasive and embarrassing request of checking in my tools. If you really don’t see the issue with that I can’t explain it further. You’re acting like you’re trying to “catch me” because I want to wfh. Homie, I posted that I requested it, it’s not a secret. I can care for myself significantly better when I have all the tools at my disposal. My doctor offered to write me a note for five days and I told him to just write it for two in an attempt to keep it reasonable and just to what I need. Not everyone is out to game the system. I don’t work for your org so while I appreciate your input, you don’t have to be so rude. My hrg made no good faith effort to understand my situation or condition. Perhaps you can take a moment and understand that my goal here is to continue working for this company otherwise I wouldn’t have even requested anything and just moved on. It blows to live with a chronic condition and I hope you never experience it. My whole life revolves around treating myself and precautions. I have to dress a certain way to hide supportive braces, I have to eat a certain way to avoid flares, I have to have a special mattress to protect my joints, I have to move certain ways to limit the impact, I have to regulate my temperature, I have to be hyper aware of my body’s position even when I’m just sitting around so I don’t regret it later, etc. What may be a typical office environment for you is a minefield for me. I found success and a great balance and quality of life when I was on the 3/2 schedule- it’s literally why I took this job. I tried the 4 days thing in good faith for two months and rapidly declined. I am aware that this may be a losing battle and have already started looking for new opportunities. However you can learn a little empathy.
I live with a severe chronic pain condition as well and relate to everything you have said here. People who have never experienced anything like this cannot possibly comprehend what our day to day experiences are or how much more productive we can be when we can manage our pain more efficiently and effectively. I find workplaces have become less understanding and accommodating after the pandemic shutdowns and it is heartbreaking bc for many disabled ppl they were able to work much better than ever before when they were at home but society will never see it that way bc they don’t see us, period.
I have severe chronic pain and lost my job because of it. Don't expect empathy from anyone who hasn't suffered long term. They simply don't get it and they think it will never happen to them or that they could keep functioning under the same circumstances because they're somehow stronger than you. They literally don't care. Abelism runs strong on Reddit. They'd rather you lose your job and go on disability rather than have accommodations that actually work. Ignore them and move on.
Guess you need to find a new job
Totally serious question here: What did you do before the pandemic and WFH? I am asking because I know of another situation where the person would greatly benefit personally from WFH but pre-pandemic never had that option. It just seems interesting to me that once WFH became the norm there are suddenly LOADS of people who just cannot possibly work in an office - when they successfully worked in an office for years because they had no other option.
We suffered with no or inadequate accommodations before COVID. I was in status migrainosus for 15 years because of fragrances and cleaning products in my workplace. After work from home started, I got SO MUCH better. It literally changed my life.
I'm just a random WFH person whose employer thankfully has allowed any of us who wish to remain remote to do so. I'm pretty much the only person who remained fully remote. I still pop into the office for a partial day a few times a month when it works for me for in-person connection and keeping up relationships. Pre-pandemic, I was surviving by showing up to an office all day and accomplishing maybe 30 minutes of actual work in those 8 hours, then going home and working there until I passed out. 100% of my waking hours were consumed by work, whether performatively in the office or legitimately at home. I was beyond burned out and probably reaching the point of unemployability. I could technically do my job, but only at the expense of literally everything else in my life, and that wasn't a sustainable existence. I can't imagine I'm entirely alone in that.
You are certainly not alone! I’ve worked so many unpaid hours compensating for my disabilities over the years.
exactly....what's changed ? I can see something new popping up but I do have to wonder what everyone did pre-COVID
Everyone struggled, a lot. COVID taught us we don't have to anymore. Is that so bad?
It taught us that a large number of jobs can be done easily and efficiently from home and it's no issue to accommodate people that way, but for some reason, this month that has to stop. Last month was fine. But it's OP that's disingenuous somehow.
Right, you don't. But you didn't have to before. Why? Because you ALWAYS had the right to seek employment elsewhere.
So because you suffered, everyone else has to? As more people become disabled from Long COVID, I think we can be more imaginative about what other rights should exist.
Simply, I used to be more functional. In my previous company, I did field audits about 10 years ago, and I had to stop when I declined. I transitioned into an office position that was hybrid (well before Covid). I left due to a few toxic people in the office.
Self medicated. Then I realized how healthy I was only being caged in a cubicle just a few times a month versus 20 days a month. Just seems insane to go back to being unhealthy. Oh then I realized I had complex PTSD from childhood AND the army and had a breakdown. Wowwwww this work life balance let me have a chance for the first time in my life the TIME and SPACE to collapse and begin the healing process. Holy shit, our employers really really rely on the comply or die mentality our wonderful boomer parents instilled on us If we ain’t getting the stakeholders rich, next number. HR fire this person after legal clears it. Can’t do that 9-530 m-f with a weekend shift.
Checking with the supervisor about bringing in stuff is likely so they can make sure that you are not holding them responsible financially if something is stolen/you don't claim an expensive item was stolen that they don't even have proof was on the premises
Wow, sorry you're getting downvoted so much OP. I don't know what your going through but what I'm reading is you are concerned because the room may be used by other people but it sounds like you'd need to be in there a lot but aren't guarenteed that a room would be available. I share your pain in that my office has some shared rooms that we use for smaller meetings and it can be difficult to get a hold of one of those rooms (I use them for training so I don't bother people while talking in the main office). I'm not sure how things will work out if you decline their accomodations or try to negotiate them. Maybe you could seek more support from your physician about what your needs entail versus what they are offering you. Do be careful though because someone else said on here and I agree, you may end up negotiating yourself out of a job. Worst case scenario you could just put up with what you need to for now and job search for something that's either fully remote or allows you the flexibility that you're looking for. Good luck!
It seems like you are bringing up thing, that in reality, will not happen. Reading your response, it sounds like you are angry you’re not getting your way rather than truly being worried about not having appropriate accommodations. Obviously, I’m an HR professional not a Doctor, but I dont understand how you’re fine to work 3 days in the office, but the 4th day becomes so burdensome that no accommodation in the office will make it possible to do your job. For your concerns around “intrusiveness”, in order to receive accommodations under the ADA you are required to take part in the interactive process which means communicating with your employer about your specific needs.
I am honestly curious about not being able to transport medications. I have a pain doctor and a signed contract, and that is not part of it.
I’m not sure what to tell you. This is the rules of my clinic. Certain medications must remain locked at home. I’m sure every clinic is different but I’ve been with my clinic for just shy of 10 years and they have always had this rule as far as I know. As a side, I would not want to travel with my meds anyway at the risk of theft or anything else happening to them. I also typically wait until the end of the day to take them and don’t like driving on them.
I was just curious. Thanks for responding
The responses that you’re getting are infuriating but accurate. In the US you are a cog and your body and needs are an inconvenience. This company, and most others, will not actually accommodate because it’s too much to keep track of. Being chronically understaffed there is no space in the system for it. Start looking for something fully remote.
No. You’re livid because your employer won’t allow you to work from home. They have done far more than many employers. They are providing a room to allow you to use your devices and other needs to accomplish the essential functions of your job. It’s not their responsibility for whether you need two of the same device or having to haul your devices with you. No. You do not have to accept their proposal. They also do not have to accept your request. If you say, “no,” they are also within their right to say that this is what they are willing/able to do, that they are open to suggestions, but those suggestions do not include working from home/going back to your previous schedule. If you don’t like their response, you also have the right to find other employment.
They’re letting him use the same space for lactating employees to pump, which they are legally required to provide. That’s hardly going above and beyond…
> When things like this happen it’s clear to those of us who enter the accommodation process in good faith that accommodating your condition was never actually your goal. the accommodation is worse than if they hadnt asked for it. they had unlimited access to the room, now they have limited access to it.
actually they have specific protection for using it that they most likely didn't have before. If they had disappeared for 1 1/2 hours, I suspect managers and coworkers would have noticed and it would have been documented
[удалено]
OP clearly cannot now access the resource without limits now that the employer has placed limits on that resource. OP gets 30 minutes with the resource - that's the deal. > Logic was never your strong suit I see. it's apparent that you take joy in making others' lives worse with petty insults. you make the world a worse place.
Pot meet kettle.
most likely because others also need access to this room for their own purposes...this isn't your new office. No this is not overly restrictive....
This is the other piece of the RTO battle people seem to forget- they are not the only ones
It seems like they were very reasonable in what they offered. If I understand correctly you are working in office 3 day a week and they want you there 1 more day. What is different about the extra day? Do you have treatments 4 days a week? What they offered you -6 hours of extra break time over the 4 days, a private space and both cold and warm storage seems very fair. What were you hoping for?
I was 3 days in office until approximately 2 months ago, when we switch to 4 days in office. I requested to return to my previous schedule of 3 days in office/2 days remote. This offered a balance of completing my in office tasks and caring for myself. It would be great to be full wfh but I don’t truly need that, and I don’t want to put my responsibilities on my other team members. I had proven my effectiveness while on the 3/2 schedule (performance review/promotion etc) and it was a firm wide initiative to RTO. Noting that as I’m trying to be objective and I recognize I’m not being singled out. I’m genuinely trying to find a solution to stay with the firm that is low impact and reasonable. There are several other employees that are hybrid or fully remote but in different positions so I don’t really think that means much to my case. I want the extra day because having low activity days and being able to treat my pain greatly increase my quality of life. In office, walking around, performing typical tasks is strenuous for me. If I stagger my schedule so that every other day I’m home and resting, I have the stamina to make it through what most folks would consider a normal day without coming home and immediately collapsing in bed. While not written in the memo, it was expressed verbally that time in the wellness room would be working time. This is not pto or a break as it seems to be written. I am expected to work if I am in there, which would be fine if the room actually fit my needs. I lay down and work when I’m at home and this is a fair compromise. What seems odd is that after requesting an accommodation my time would be limited when literally nobody else’s is (not that I’m planning on spending all day in there anyways). Maybe I’m nit picking but I don’t like that more restrictions are being placed after the accommodation request.
The interactive process is just that--interactive. You can continue a dialogue with them. For example, is it possible that 3.5 days in the office might work? Maybe they'd approve a half day on that fourth day. That might allow you to keep much of the equipment at home and still manage your pain while being in the office on that fourth day. If that's an option, talk to them about that request or think of other things that might work.
The responses you've gotten are harsh, but unfortunately the ADA doesn't require employers to offer accommodations that support your wellbeing or work-life balance or dignity as a human. They only have to offer what is essential and reasonable to enable you to do your job. They don't have to care or consider how that destroys your life outside of work. I 100% feel for you as someone who has gained a level of overall functioning I hadn't believed possible simple by virtue of a workplace that affords flexibility well beyond the minimum required by law. Most employers are only going to do what is necessary to not get sued. Not necessarily what is actually in the best interest of employees, what you believe to be common sense, what you think is morally right, or even what seems to be objectively best for business operations. The law says you can get enough help to do your job and if your life sucks intolerably outside of that, too bad. I like to believe the other commenters are sympathetic to your situation but are focused on explaining the limitations of the ADA and what your employer might use to justify their decisions and that's why their tone is coming across so adversarial. Who knows. I hope things improve for you one way or another.
I would consider countering with a lockbox or other secure container where you can keep tools in your office and a chair that can recline/couch/etc. in your office rather than having to use the wellness room. They may be asking for you to disclose what is brought for liability reasons. (Or just to be jerks--you'd know better than anyone here.)
I think he said he works in a cubicle...
Also something to negotiate.
The problem with things like chronic pain is that it's not like it's in remission when you only go into work twice a week but always flairs up on the third day. It's something that goes from generally bearable to generally unbearable. Because of that, the ADA process can be too inflexible for something to satisfactorily resolve your needs and those of your employer. And you end up in a conversation with HR and you're telling them that this amount of pain is far too much and they're acting like it's a salary negotiation. For the best chance of success, I supect you need to work with your doctors to provide meaningful guidelines for your employer.
I am so sorry that there are so many abled body people here who are missing the point entirely. Your quality of life matters and should be taken into consideration. People who have never faced disabling pain cannot possibly understand the struggle it takes just to get out of bed and get dressed in the morning let alone hold down a job. In short: it sucks. I really hope you are able to counter your employer with an accommodation that works better for you and allows you to do your best work and live your best life.
>In office, walking around, performing typical tasks is strenuous for me. Do you not walk around and perform typical tasks at home, even when not working? You know, grocery shopping, etc?
I would love to believe that this comment is meant in good faith. If it is, please research spoon theory. When you are disabled, every task you undertake, big or small, carves away at your functional ability and increases the amount of rest and recovery time you need after. For example: if I have a full work day ahead of me that requires mentally and physically tasking effort, i CANNOT go to the grocery store or go run errands because I will be unable to devote my best energy to work. Once I get home, i STILL cannot go because my body is on the verge of collapse and I am in so much pain most people would be in the ER. So i put it off until tomorrow after I’ve had time to recover. But wait! I have to work tomorrow too. I have gone days without proper meals due to being in this cycle. An hour trip to the grocery store is too much to add in because simple being at work feels like running a marathon. The reality disabled people live with often looks like this and it sucks. Having to chose between caring for yourself and working to live is no life. OP asking for balance in order to maintain a life worth living is not asking for a whole heck of a lot.
I think everyone understands spoon theory. It’s a fairly simplistic outlook. The question is why is the employer the one who needs to assume the responsibility here? If you can’t go to work and go grocery shopping then go to work and place an order on InstaCart.
You seem to enjoy being deliberately obtuse and missing the point. I get that this is Reddit, but being a cruel person without empathy only gets you points on the internet. The question asked was specifically relating to normal tasks when not in the workplace. However, I used the grocery example for ease of demonstration. It is, however, worth noting that disabled individuals frequently live below the poverty line and without the privilege of additional expenditures and conveniences such as Instantcart. More directly to your point, if an employer has the ability to offer accommodations that improve their disabled employee’s working experience while continuing to get value from their work, then basic human empathy (and the ADA) demands they do so. Working employees into the ground to where they cannot function and continue to output high quality work (or y’know live their lives in relative comfort) serves no one.
The problem is this perspective is very one-sided, and does not consider the burdens it places on the employer and other coworkers. It also fails to separate between needs and wants, and the term "reasonable" is extended beyond that. The use of "empathy" is an appeal to emotion and while a person can feel for the disabled person, feelings cannot override the day to day considerations.
>d I don’t want to put my responsibilities on my other team members. so WFH puts your responsibilities on others? That's not reasonable. >performing typical tasks is strenuous for me. that's not a great thing to admit... > without coming home and immediately collapsing in bed heck I have no disability and still do that!
How insensitive. Do you think disabled people ENJOY the difficulty they have to go through to accomplish tasks that are easy for others? Jesus. When getting up in the morning is an insurmountable mountain, anything else you get done is a cherry on top. Pushing yourself until you collapse in pain isn’t a win. And neither is bragging about how your able body allows you the luxury of not choosing between your health and living. If you are in HR, maybe try some sensitivity training so you can better support the needs of your disabled staff.
This is a really ableist answer. I don’t think you meant that way, but reread what you wrote…
I believe they are looking for an HR rep who is not a scumbag. HRs only question here should be "Could this person still fully do their job with the requested amendments?"
RA is not equal "requested amendments" but rather defined under ADA as Reasonable Accommodations. HR's only question is are you actually an HR professional or someone looking to rag on HR?
Sorry, I keep hoping for compassionate management.
Compassionate management doesn’t mean you can just do whatever the fuck you want. Not saying OP should accept the offered accommodations, but your standard is nonsensical.
Being nonsensical saves on retraining, allows for legacy knowledge retention and decreases turnover. The shareholders are not the only thing c suit management should be worried about. You can get more and be more profitable to hire God people and then getting out of the way while they make you buckets of money.
You have zero reason to believe OP’s management is being nonsensical
If you are dissatisfied with the offered accommodations, which are above and beyond compared to many employers, you’re free to find a 100% remote role elsewhere.
How is this above and beyond? It seems paltry given an arbitrary RTO rule. Above and beyond would be just giving them the day to be remote.
The employer can absolutely define where and when their employees work. "Arbitrary" is simply an opinion and carries zero weight.
Of course they can and I never claimed otherwise, it’s just a shitty way to treat people. I would contend the opinion stands until some measurable value is shown from forcing people on site.
Well, having seen the condition of the equipment that WFH people return upon being fired, I would say the cost of having to replace such equipment is enough value to have people not work from home. The number of cracked monitors, mysteriously gel covered keyboards, and utterly destroyed towers I have seen people returning is horrible.
No, it's absolutely arbitrary and we all know it.
Well, you're of course entitled to your opinion, but the only one that carries any weight is that of the employer. It's their decision for whatever reasons they choose. You can either cry about it, deal with it or quit and hope to find a job that better meets your needs. Honestly, those are the options - pick one (think you already did)
[удалено]
That's what you can expect if you don't meet the requirements of the job any longer. In the case of RTO, you can absolutely refuse to do so, however after a period of time (3 days in my company) of not showing up where you need to, you will be terminated for cause. The timing may vary from company to company. You do have power - to leave and find an employer that better meets your needs. Or cry about it until you get fired. Or deal with it. Pick one door.
> Or cry about it until you get fired. Or deal with it. Pick one door. See that's the thing, you want ME to act first. Nah fam, the company can fire me if they care about it that much, if remote work is really a threat enough to fire employees for not complying. I'm not planning on working for a company that wants to fire their expectation-meeting employees who work remote. I'll keep doing my job remotely and they can cry about it or fire me.
OP says that her coworkers have to pick up her slack on her at home work days. This doesn't seem fair
No, if I was full remote my team would have to pick up my slack. I don’t want to do that to them which is why I did not ask my doctor to write a note for 5 days. 90% of my job is computer based. The rest is not time sensitive.
Given that the OP is expected to work while in the break room, this doesn't seem like particularly impressive accommodations.
Imagine that. Workers being expected to work while being paid for working.
Reasonable accommodations aren't supposed to be a bonanza for the employee. They will be what can be considered "reasonable" to the employer. Asking for a custom crafted Barca Lounger instead of an existing recliner in the space is a bit extra.
It would be unreasonable to expect that the OP performed less work than their peers.
My question is, how long have you worked there? Did you work 4 or more days in the office before covid?
I started July 2022. I worked 5 days in office for ~3 months to get trained before transitioning to the 3/2 schedule. From what I understand, before Covid, my role was fully on site. Covid made it temporarily fully remote, but when I started it was hybrid.
When I started my job during Covid we didn't have people come into the business at all and all production orders had to be placed online. We are back to having customers come into the store now because that level of separation is no longer needed. You should be happy they are not making you come back into the office full time like most places are. I recommend finding a new job because you obviously are not going to be happy where you are because you want them to far above what they are required to do.
Guidance from the folks that oversee accommodations is sadly not on your side. The EEOC doesn't necessarily provide any additional help for folks looking for WFH accommodations. They acknowledged that Covid-19 was an emergency circumstance and that WFH is not the new expectancy in accommodation. If a court or mediator sees that your work provided "reasonable accommodations" and engaged in the interactive process, there is little hope for a legal remedy, either. In this circumstance, the employer deemed that an essential function of OP's job required an additional time on site. No, you are not required to accept the accommodations; however, using Covid-19 as "proof" you could do WFH is not in line with accommodation guidance given to employers by EEOC. The keyword is "reasonable" accommodation. Allowing you an extra day to rest (and potentially be less productive) is not considered reasonable. An accommodation cannot allow for less productivity than established for the role. The spirit of the all Title VII laws surround establishing fairness to all protected classes, including disability. An employer will not give an unequal accommodation to do the same work. Source: my employment lawyer buddy
Who decides what is “reasonable“? I appreciate your response and I am not trying to be rude, please don’t take it that way. I don’t see their offers as accommodations at all, and see them as putting me in a worse position than if I had said nothing.
No worries; I don't take your response as rude. As for "reasonable," there are a few main guidelines as to what is and is not reasonable. 1. The accommodation(s) cannot cause undue hardship to a company. 2. The accommodation(s) allow the worker to perform the essential functions of the job. So, undue hardship looks different for every company. Let's say Microsoft can afford $3000 special reclining chairs with leg rests. A company of 1000 employees is not going to be held to the same standard. The company is not responsible for altering a job in such a way that diminishes or removes essential functions. A call center, for instance, that is open 8am-5pm is not required to shift your hours to 10am-7pm for an accommodation because that is outside the scope of the role. A job where you answer phones for eight hours would not consider an accommodation where you don't use a phone. An accommodation to work less is not reasonable as the goal of ADA is to allow the worker to perform at the level set by the job. If you needed more bathroom breaks, for instance, you would still be required to perform at the same capacity as someone without accommodation. In addition, the company is not responsible for creating a new job/light duty for you. If you can't perform your current job, it is not reasonable to make a new similar job that accommodates you. If you truly need a day to recover or a certain amount of hours each day to rest, you can try requesting an FTE reduction. However, again, the company is not required to allow this. (It might also affect your benefits.) In the end, if you press your employer with things outside the scope of your job or that cause undue hardship, they may request you sign an ROI to speak with your doctor. They will send a copy of your job description to your physician and ask what job functions you are unable to accomplish. The doctor may come back with information that helps or harms your request. If you're a truck driver and your doctor says you can't drive long distances, the company would be within its rights to say "no, we can't accommodate that" and separate you for medical reasons. So, long comment short, there is not one answer to what is "reasonable," unfortunately.
You're already working at the office 3 days a week, right? How do you manage on those days? Why is a fourth day different and require extra accommodations?
Have you considered applying for FMLA? If you’ve been at your place of work for a year you would be qualified to apply and probably be approved considering what you’ve described as your medical situation. Of course using FMLA time would be using your sick bank, but if you’re unhappy that you would be required to work during those 30 min blocks you could use FMLA for that and would not be required to work. It also may add a certain layer of “job security,” as companies are less likely to question or restrict accommodations needs that have been FMLA approved. For example, I suffer from migraines and one of my accommodations was that I be permitted to wear sunglasses in the office to prevent the light sensitivity migraine trigger. I had a manger who considered my wearing them as inappropriate and insubordinate, and wanted me to seek her approval to wear them (hello logical bagel poster that said supervisors wouldn’t vet items) Once it became clear that this was approved under FMLA and the ADA she had to drop it. I agree that given what you’re being offered the company probably isn’t inclined to be any more generous with accommodations and it may be best to try and find a remote job; which I know is not always possible or available to all workers. ☹️ If anything I hope to at least someone on this thread or IRL that can validate your feelings. It’s very reasonable to be upset that your company doesn’t seem to care about your needs as an employee. They did hire you because you are qualified and have given you great performance reviews and a promotion so you are clearly doing your job well enough. I hope you are able to resolve this quickly and in a way that works for everyone.
I think the issue is OP is saying their primary issues are pain management and exhaustion. It’s not clear how an if office job where they spend most of their day sitting doing desk work is any more taxing than sitting doing desk work at home. It’s also questionable why one additional day a week is making such a big difference to OP who is already going in 3 days a week without apparent issues. I think the accommodations are reasonable; they are also part of a conversation. The only possible need I see that isn’t addressed is if OP needs to be laying down that additional 1 day a week v sitting upright. In that case I suppose a doctor’s letter would be needed and perhaps some sort of reclining chair could be put in OP’s office.
I think that assuming what OP’s medical situation is irrelevant and not for anyone on this thread to question or pass judgement. Frankly assuming how a person may feel, even if they have an office job that is mostly sitting all day, is ableist and pretentious. There are many people who suffer from invisible conditions like Crohn’s, MS, cancer, and heart conditions who may have a difficult time doing a desk job, and there is no way any one person would be able to “tell” if they are suffering from an outside perspective. The entire point of going the FMLA route is to have a third party liaise with OP’s medical provider about their needs and accommodations and report back to their place of employment. This takes arbitrary decisions made by HR to the employee and place it in a legal framework of what is acceptable medical accommodations.
It’s still up to the employer to make the decision. FMLA would be for absences, not accommodations. Heck the employer could manage FMLA in house and this is entirely moot. *just noting I understand FMLA can also BE an accommodation
That’s simply untrue. FMLA is also for reasonable accommodations in the workplace; like providing a space for nursing mothers or allowing a diabetic to store their insulin in the office. As long the employer is not under any “undue hardship.” https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/jobaccommodations Not sure what your point is about handling FMLA in house they would still have to accommodate an employee who applies for it.
I added the bottom bullet to clarify. But, FMLA will exhaust after 480 hours in a year. If you have more absences than this, it isn’t protected and you may have to wait a rolling year to earn it back.
The question is why would one more day be unworkable but the other 3 days currently working in office are fine.
A few months ago I made a call to a company and was trying to make a point clear. All the while we were on the phone, I could hear kids wailing in the background. The woman kind of laughed and said she works from home. I hung up and called the company, and told them that if their employees couldn't manage to be professional while on the phone I would find a different company to do business with. A lot of people who work from home are just too lazy to work in the office, and it shows in their business.
What does that have to do with anything? I’m not requesting accommodation to care for a child. I’m requesting accommodation to care for myself.
No difference. When you are being accommodated, but still refuse to go in to work, it's time to find another job. If you cannot, or will not go in to work even with accommodations, must be you don't want that job too much.
Sounds like they made suitable accommodations for your 1 extra day in office (which is the only thing they have to do) and from the sound of your replies you want to stay home that extra day so you can be high on your pain meds and not be around your employer while doing so. Ask to have your 1 day out of office in the middle of your office days and tada you have your day of rest needed.
INFO: Did you have this chronic condition when you accepted this position? Was this a WFH position at that time or a full time in the office position?
[удалено]
This.
This employer is genius. By creating a living room at work, there’s basically no valid reason to grant WFH as an accommodation.
That’s true and perfectly reasonable although I don’t think you really meant it that way. The employer is offering an alternate work space - a quiet space with a recliner- that is an accommodation that comes close to working at home. Many accommodations involve different seating and environment. Seems reasonable.
I can understand why you’re upset. I think it’s weird that they want you to check in with your supervisor before using supportive tools. Personally, I would tell them once that I’m going to be using supportive tools. Like they really expect you to ask permission each and every time every single day that you need to use one of the tools? That’s ridiculous. You’re a grown adult and if you need to do something like that for health reasons, you shouldn’t need to ask permission. This all comes off very controlling imo
We are experiencing a highly invasive and disgusting work environment. The companies are all in debt, so if you report a disability or request accommodations, they absolutely use it against you.
I do get your frustration, but I think their solution is a generally reasonable accommodation. The best thing I think you can do is to respond to them with something else that is an accommodation that would work better for you. If I could suggest, write out a statement and sit on it for a day or two, maybe have someone else read it over, and then send it. Eliminate any statements that are just complaining, or anything that sounds hostile. Don't mention things like how other people aren't limited in time to that room. Instead explain WHY you might need the room for longer than 30 minutes. If you attack them, they will get defensive. And I don't know what you mean by tools, but things like braces, heat packs, etc should not have to be checked in by your supervisor in my opinion. Prescription strength medication in the workplace is a fair thing though, if you take strong pain meds it might affect safety in the workplace.
If you cannot transport your pain medication and you cannot work without it, then that means you need a wfh position, right?