A Michigan hospital, William Beaumont Hospital, now Corewell Health East, agreed to pay $30,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit, in addition to providing non-monetary relief.
The lawsuit, filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, contains allegations that the hospital refused to provide job reassignment to a vacant position as a reasonable accommodation for a nurse with a disability.
The hospital allegedly determined the nurse would not be able to work fewer than 32 hours per week in her current position as a reasonable accommodation for her work restriction related to disability.
In response, the nurse claimed she expressed interest in several other jobs she thought she could perform with her hours restriction. The nurse requested to be placed in any of those positions; however, in April 2019, the hospital allegedly refused to transfer her to a vacant position for which she was qualified.
The nurse was forced to apply, and compete, for open positions. And, after several months of submitting applications, the nurse allegedly acquired a position on her own.
Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/william-beaumont-hospital-pay-30000-eeoc-disability-discrimination-lawsuit
Commentary
Part 1630 of the Title I regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act specifies reassignment to a vacant job position as a recognized form of reasonable accommodation. It is similarly recognized in the formal EEOC enforcement guidance.
There is no duty to create a vacant position either by making a new job or removing another employee from a job in order to reassign an employee as an accommodation.
Reassignment is simply a possible reasonable accommodation where other accommodations are not possible or feasible in the employee's current job or when reassignment would be a preferable accommodation instead of remaining in the current job.
According to the EEOC's interpretation, there is no requirement for the employee to complete for the vacant position so long as it is not a promotion. However, some courts have disagreed with the EEOC's interpretation, ruling that employers are not required to give employees with disabilities preferential treatment by cutting out the competition process when considering reassignment as an accommodation.
In the healthcare sector, patient care obligations may clash with job reassignment as a reasonable accommodation in some cases. For example, in EEOC v. Methodist Hospitals of Dallas, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the hospital's policy of hiring the most qualified candidate did not violate the ADA and therefore it did not have to give preferential hiring treatment to an employee with a disability who was seeking reassignment.
The court cited patient safety, specifically stating "[w]hen the lives of patients are on the line, mandatory reassignment in violation of a best-qualified system is unreasonable in the run of cases".
Other circuit courts would disagree, and would place the qualified employee with a disability in vacant position as a reasonable accommodation. Employers should remember that accommodations are always on a case-by-case basis.
The final takeaway is that, to avoid the risks, healthcare organizations should consult with local legal counsel if reassignment is considered as a reasonable accommodation and never fail to perform the interactive process.
Sources: https://www.eeoc.gov/disability-discrimination-and-employment-decisions; https://askjan.org/topics/Reassignment.cfm; https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/17-10539/17-10539-2023-03-17.html
