When it comes to employee leaves of absences, compliance with the overlapping requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) can challenge even the most seasoned of human resources professionals. A recent federal court case highlights some of the pitfalls awaiting employers when an employee asks for additional leave as an accommodation under the ADA. (Valdez v. McGill)

In Valdez, a warehouse supervisor, Rocky Brown, took FMLA leave for a surgery related to colon cancer. (Brown later died and his personal representative, Gabriella Valdez, appealed the case on his behalf.) When Brown returned to work, he again took FMLA leave—this time intermittent leave—to address several of his reoccurring health issues. This occurred for about a year until Brown presented a note from his physician advising that he still had cancer, as well as bronchitis and fatigue, and that he could not work for two weeks. One day before Brown’s anticipated return to work (based on his doctor’s note), the company notified him that he had exhausted the 12 weeks of FMLA leave available to him. That same day, Brown obtained another note from his physician advising that he “may return to work” in three more weeks. Upon review of this note, the company terminated Brown’s employment because of his poor work performance and excessive absences. Brown sued claiming, among other things, that the company failed to accommodate his disability and that it should have given him more leave time as a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.

In the last few years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has seized on this issue and aggressively pursued its position in litigation that an employer has an obligation to provide additional leave as a reasonable accommodation; but even the EEOC has recognized that employers have no obligation to provide leave of an indefinite duration.

Please see full article below for further information.