October 2025
Volume 19 Issue 1
New Workplace Accommodation Toolkits
The Job Accommodation Network’s (JAN) Workplace Accommodation Toolkit provides employers step-by-step guidance, templates, checklists, and training materials to confidently navigate the ADA accommodation process. Check out JAN’s toolkit.
Northeast ADA Center’s Welcoming Employees Toolkit provides information and resources about how (and why!) small businesses can successfully hire and retain employees with disabilities.
Check out Northeast ADA Center’s toolkit which includes expert guidance on following the ADA.
New Resource for Veterans with Disabilities
The Department’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service and the Office of Disability Employment Policy developed a Veterans Accommodations Toolkit focusing on increasing employment rates and participation in apprenticeship programs by veterans with disabilities. Learn more about this toolkit including strategies to help improve workplace supports and ADA accommodations.
Peer Mentoring & Employment for People with Disabilities
A new study identified key features of peer mentoring programs that successfully help individuals with physical disabilities achieve their employment goals. The findings will guide the development of a training curriculum to better prepare peer mentors to support employment outcomes. Read more about the study.
Answer: It depends. A physical or mental condition that substantially limits a major life activity is considered a disability under the ADA. There is no automatic cut off for the length of time an impairment must last before it can be considered a disability. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has stated a medical condition does not need to be long-term, permanent, or severe to be substantially limiting. Also, if symptoms come and go, what matters is how limiting the symptoms are when they are active.
For example, if an individual has a back impairment that results in a 20-pound lifting restriction that lasts for several months, they could be substantially limited in the major life activity of lifting even though the impairment and limitation are not permanent.
Resource(s):
Learn more by visiting our ADA Frequently Asked Questions.
EEOC v. Piedmont Cheerwine Bottling Company (Cheerwine)
According to the suit, an employee took medication for her disability which resulted in a limp while she walked. The company required her to submit to a medical examination weeks earlier than other probationary employees because of her disability. Even though the employee met the physical requirements of the position, Cheerwine placed her on unpaid leave and told her to obtain a complete medical clearance before returning. The employee submitted a doctor’s note clearing her to work, but Cheerwine rejected the note and fired her.
EEOC v. Virginia International Terminals, LLC (VIT)
VIT will pay $20,000 to settle lawsuit. According to the suit, the employee worked as a hustler truck driver, moving shipping containers around an airport terminal at a max speed of 20 mph. The driver was hospitalized after a cardiac event and received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. EEOC alleged that after his procedure, VIT refused to allow him back to work as a hustler driver, even though he received a medical release, and instead offered lower-paying work.
EEOC v. American Multi-Cinema (AMC)
According to the lawsuit, AMC forced an employee with cerebral palsy to quit after it deprived him of reasonable accommodations which would have enabled him to better perform his job and then greatly reduced his hours. EEOC alleged the theater refused to provide a ticket scanner with a strap and side button which would have been easier for him to use, and a printed list of the movies and their corresponding theaters in large font.
EEOC v. Sanmina Corporation (Sanmina)
Sanmina will pay $77,500 to settle the lawsuit. According to the suit, after allowing employees to work from home for two years, Sanmina required employees to return onsite. The employee requested a reasonable accommodation to continue working remotely. Although Sanmina told her she could continue to work from home pending any further consideration of her requested accommodation, the company fired her several months later without notice, because she continued to exercise her reasonable accommodation of working remotely due to her disabilities.
EEOC v. Tower Automotive Operations USA I, LLC
According to the suit, the employee, who had over 30 years’ experience in automotive manufacturing, joined the manufacturer’s apprenticeship program in 2018 as the only female apprentice, and performed successfully. After a layoff, the company allowed men to resume their apprenticeships. It recalled the female employee, but refused allow her to re-enter the apprenticeship program, denying her a higher wage and opportunities for overtime. Instead, the company allowed three younger men to enter the program in 2022 as new apprentices. The company reinstated her as an apprentice in 2025 but paid her a lower apprentice rate.
According to the suit, the employee had a seizure at work and called out sick for a handful of days. Fluent then instructed the employee to obtain a doctor’s note before she could return to work. The employee provided the note, which included a request for reasonable accommodation. Instead of discussing the request with the employee, the company immediately terminated her.
According to the lawsuit, following a suicide attempt resulting from mental health conditions, employee requested approximately four to six weeks of unpaid leave to receive outpatient medical treatment. The suit alleged that even though executives knew the employee asked for time off to seek treatment for mental health-related disabilities, the company denied her unpaid leave request and fired her.
EEOC v. National retailer Barnes & Noble College Booksellers, LLC
According to the suit, after receiving a diagnosis of postpartum depression from her physician, the employee contacted human resources to request unpaid leave beyond the 90-day maximum permitted under the company’s leave policy. Instead of working with the employee to find a reasonable accommodation, the company encouraged her to resign and fired her.
EEOC v. Digital Intelligence Systems, LLC (Dexian DISYS)
The EEOC charged that when a DISYS recruiter learned a candidate was “hard of hearing” and required an accommodation for the interview, all recruiting efforts ceased. The recruiter did not respond to further inquiries by the candidate, including a query about whether or not the candidate was being discriminated against because of his disability.
EEOC v. Bollinger Shipyards, LLC (Bollinger)
The EEOC charged that Bollinger placed a worker on involuntary indefinite unpaid leave from her position as a shipfitter after it learned of her prescription. Bollinger excluded the worker even though the worker had performed her role safely and competently. EEOC alleged that the employee, who was recovering from opioid dependency, used her medication lawfully under her physician’s supervision and was qualified to continue performing her job.
EEOC v. Walmart Inc. - Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin
According to the lawsuit, Walmart refused to accommodate an employee who required a job coach due to his intellectual disability and subjected him and a coworker to a hostile work environment based on their disabilities.
EEOC v. Yellowhouse Machinery Co. (Yellowhouse)
According to the suit, for almost three years, a receptionist who suffers from debilitating chronic migraines triggered by prolonged exposure to bright light was allowed to work under dimmed overhead lighting. But in 2024, the store manager abruptly replaced the existing lighting with bright LED bulbs. The receptionist submitted a doctor’s note to the manager, explaining her medical need for dimmer lighting. Yellowhouse refused to do anything other than move her desk a few feet — an ineffective measure which failed to alleviate her symptoms.
EEOC v. American Airlines, Inc. (American)
According to the lawsuit, American failed to provide a reasonable accommodation to an employee after she developed cortical blindness. The employee requested use of screen reader software to convert text and other information on computers into synthesized speech. Instead providing a reasonable accommodation, American kept her on unpaid involuntary leave for almost four years and then fired her after failing to facilitate her return to work.
EEOC v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc and American Drug Stores LLC (Jewel-Osco)
EEOC and Jewel-Osco entered into a voluntary agreement in which Jewel-Osco agreed to pay $1.95 million in monetary relief to a group of affected individuals and to provide other non-monetary relief such as disability training for management and policy revisions. The agreement resolves charges filed alleging that Jewel-Osco denied reasonable accommodations to a group of employees based on their various disabilities.
EEOC v. Talecris Plasma Resources
According to the lawsuit, a nurse who applied for position had her job offer revoked after she asked for an accommodation for her alcohol and substance use disorders. The nurse successfully completed a drug rehabilitation program eight months earlier and was participating in a treatment program with Colorado’s Peer Assistance Services, Inc. for health care professionals.
EEOC v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company United, Inc. (CCBCU)
According to the suit, the employee who worked as a delivery driver was diagnosed with renal disease requiring dialysis. After he asked for a change in his work schedule to accommodate his dialysis, CCBCU determined he could not work a different schedule as an accommodation and told the employee to apply and compete for other jobs in the company aligned with his medical restrictions. The employee identified and applied for a job with a schedule allowing him to continue dialysis while working full time. Even though he was qualified for the position, CCBCU refused to place him into the position, and terminated him.
EEOC v. Elon Property Management LLC (Elon Property)
Elon Property agreed to pay $200,000 to settle lawsuit. EEOC charged the company retaliated against a district manager for taking a medical leave of absence when it placed her on a performance improvement plan the day she returned from leave. The company also punished her for a decline in occupancy rates at her properties while she was on leave.
In September 2025, Disability Rights Advocates and Lathan & Watkins LLP filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of four Chicagoland residents with mobility disabilities against the City of Chicago, challenging its widespread and ongoing failure to make its sidewalks, curb ramps, and other public pedestrian rights of way accessible to people with mobility disabilities.
A federal judge has ordered Wisconsin to give back pay to disabled workers who were denied unemployment over the past decade. The case also found that a “blanket denial” of unemployment payments to Wisconsinite receiving Social Security disability payments violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
DOJ v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber)
DOJ filed a lawsuit against Uber for discriminating against passengers with disabilities, including blind individuals who use service animals and those who use mobility devices including stowable wheelchairs, by routinely refusing to serve these individuals, imposing impermissible charges, and refusing to reasonably modify Uber’s policies to avoid discrimination.
DOJ v. Sunrise Hospital & Medical Center, LLC (Sunrise)
The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Nevada secured an agreement with Sunrise to ensure that patients and their companions who are deaf have appropriate auxiliary aids and services, including qualified in-person or video remote interpreting services.
