The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that a hospital did not have to allow a nursing student to bring a service dog to work under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because the accommodation created a direct threat to health and safety. A nursing student was assigned to work at the hospital to complete her clinical training. She requested approval for her service dog to accompany her while at work, to assist with managing her panic disorder. Initially, the hospital granted the request for accommodation and allowed the service dog to accompany the student at all times. The hospital immediately received complaints of allergic reactions from staff and patients. The hospital revoked its approval, re-evaluated the accommodation, and engaged in the ADA interactive process with the student. There were no reasonable measures that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the health and safety risk to staff and patients from the service dog, short of moving staff and patients to accommodate the dog. The court found that the hospital had fulfilled its ADA duties, engaged in the interactive process in good faith, and did not unlawfully discriminate based on disability (Bennett v. Hurley Medical Center, 6th Cir, Nov. 2023).
Tips: This case illustrates the difficulty of resolving conflicting disability accommodation requests, when one person’s workplace accommodation causes medical complications for coworkers or clients. You should analyze each person’s situation individually and then step back to assess whether there are any reasonable accommodations that would work for everyone. If not, you’ll have to prioritize. Depending on the situation, it may make sense to take into account the number of individuals affected, the criticality of the job being performed, employee seniority (giving priority to longer-serving workers), and the disruption to the workplace. Whatever your decision, you should document the options you explored, the difficulties you encountered, and your reasoning in reaching a conclusion.
Under the ADA, employers must reasonably accommodate an employee’s disability unless it would cause an undue hardship to the employer or pose a direct threat to health and safety. A direct threat determination is made on a case-by-case basis. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations at 29 CFR 1630.2(r) outline the following factors for consideration: “(1) The duration of the risk; (2) The nature and severity of the potential harm; (3) The likelihood that the potential harm will occur; and (4) The imminence of the potential harm.”
Generally, a “direct threat” determination also involves obtaining a medical opinion from the employee’s healthcare provider. A direct threat assessment cannot be based on speculation, stereotypes, or generalization about someone’s disability. This is a very complex area of the law. Please contact your assigned Vigilant Law Group employment attorney if you need assistance with a specific situation. See our Legal Guides, At a Glance: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ADA: Reasonable Accommodation and the Interactive Process for more information on disability accommodation and defenses.
