The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (covering Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee) ruled on April 22, 2014 that under the Americans with Disability Act, an employer may be required to permit an employee to telecommute and work from home as part of a “reasonable accommodation.” In the case, Ford Motor Co. employee Jane Harris suffered from irritable bowel syndrome and requested to work from home up to four days a week as an accommodation under the ADA.

Harris was a resale steel buyer whose primary job required telephone and computer contact with co-workers and suppliers.

The U.S. District Court had granted summary judgment for Ford, holding that attendance at the job site was an essential function of Harris's job and that her disability-related absences meant she was not a “qualified individual” under the ADA. The District Court also found that her telecommute request was not a “reasonable accommodation.”

However, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's decision, finding that “physical presence” at the Ford facility is a fact-specific issue and that advancing technology has diminished the necessity of in-person contact. The appeals court found that there was an issue of material fact as to whether physical attendance at work was an essential function of Harris's job.

On June 6, 2014 Ford and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed petition briefs asking the appeals court to rehear the case. The Chamber argues that the decision permits an employee to determine her work schedule in an unpredictable, ad hoc manner, based upon her own subjective judgment on a day-to-day basis, despite evidence presented by the employer that regular, predictable attendance and physical presence in the office were essential functions of the job in question.

The Chamber states that the Sixth Circuit's decision will have a devastating effect on employers and their employees in the court's territory.

Given the recent decision, employers should cautiously evaluate and consider requests by employees to telecommute for their jobs. Before denying a request to telecommute for work, employers should be prepared to provide objective reasons why physical presence is required.

In other words, the employer must be able to objectively show the value of the physical presence for the particular job in question.

—————–

Martin J. Boetcher is a labor and employment lawyer in Youngstown, Ohio.