Dive Brief:
- Kroger will pay $75,000 to settle claims that it unlawfully discriminated against a cashier who requested an accommodation for nerve damage associated with cancer treatments, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Monday.
- According to a lawsuit filed in a Georgia federal district court last year, the employee requested to sit on a stool or chair while working the cash register. EEOC alleged that a store manager told the employee that Kroger did not “do accommodations like that” and would instead find her lighter work to perform.
- After the manager instructed her to file medical documentation, the employee did not receive additional follow-up on her request, EEOC claimed. The agency alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court approved a consent decree between the parties in which Kroger denied the allegations.
Dive Insight:
The facts of the case, as alleged by EEOC, provide an insight into how the ADA’s interactive process can break down between an employee requesting accommodation for a disability and management.
According to the agency’s guidance, this process begins when an employee makes such a request or when the employer knows, or has reason to know, that a disability exists or may be affecting an employee’s job performance. From there, employers must assess the request and determine whether the employee can perform the essential functions of their job with reasonable accommodation, absent undue hardship. Employers are not required to select an employee’s preferred accommodation and may choose among reasonable accommodations so long as the chosen one is effective, EEOC has said.
The interactive process is a standard one but has many potential pitfalls for employers, attorneys previously told HR Dive, particularly when managers or HR staff resist engaging in the process or lack the training necessary to identify when an accommodation could be needed.
In its complaint, EEOC said the cashier initially contacted the store manager about her disability in April 2023 following a medical emergency. She provided the manager medical documentation and a plan to return to work and followed up via a phone call days later, in which the manager allegedly said he had “forgotten to discuss the accommodation with HR” but would do so soon.
But after receiving no further contact for four days, the cashier directly contacted an HR manager, who said she had received no notice of her accommodation request or supporting documentation. After multiple attempts to provide updated documentation and repeated subsequent phone calls, the cashier received no answer to her request and had not been scheduled for work since, EEOC claimed.
The fact pattern in the Georgia case bears much similarity to a lawsuit in Texas, where EEOC alleged that a Kroger store rescinded a previously granted accommodation allowing an employee with neuropathy to use a walker and have frequent chances to sit. Litigation in that case is ongoing.
EEOC has brought similar cases against employers in recent years, leading to settlements. Earlier this year, a manufacturer agreed to pay $100,000 in a lawsuit alleging that it unlawfully demoted an employee who requested an accommodation that would have cost a fraction of the settlement amount. And last year, the agency inked a $150,000 agreement with an employer it alleged refused to provide snack breaks to a diabetic employee whom the employer later fired.