Employment Rights During Covid 19
EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS DURING COVID-19 ATTORNEYS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
Protecting the Rights of Workers During the Pandemic
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that COVID-19 was an international pandemic. The president of the United States declared a national state of emergency on March 13, 2020, concerning the pandemic.
Teleworking as a Reasonable Accommodation During a Pandemic
As a consequence of this pandemic, international, federal, state, and local health officials have strongly encouraged that individuals engage in teleworking as a part of the “social distancing” approach to combating the spread of the virus. However, not all employers had heeded this call for social distancing and instead have required employees to physically come to work.
Employees with disabilities that put them at high risk of harm if exposed to the virus are rightly concerned. However, under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act, these employees have the right to request teleworking as a reasonable accommodation for their disabilities.
As recently updated guidelines from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission state, “employees with disabilities that put them at high risk for complications of pandemic influenza may request telework as a reasonable accommodation to reduce their chances of infection during a pandemic.” The EEOC emphasizes that employers must provide such reasonable accommodations unless they demonstrate undue hardship.
Contact Us to Learn More
Contact the attorneys at Clark Law Group, PLLC if you need assistance navigating reasonable workplace accommodations in light of COVID-19. Call or our office in Chicago.
LINCOLN-ODUMU V. MEDICAL FACULTY ASSOCS.
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88659 (D.D.C. July 8, 2016) Holding that the D.C. Wage Payment Collection Law protects employees of DC employer who are dispatched outside of DC to telework from home.
JAFARI V. OLD DOMINION TRANSIT MANAGEMENT CO.
462 Fed.Appx. 385 (4th Cir. 2012) Holding that an employee’s intracompany complaint may constitute protected activity within meaning of FLSA’s anti-retaliation provision.
FRANCOIS V. OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION
1601-0007-18 (D.C. Office of Employee Appeals, July 18, 2019) Denying OSSE’s petition to review the AJ’s ruling that OSSE did not have requisite cause to remove the complainant employee from her employment.
CONGRESS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
324 F.Supp.3d 164 (D.D.C. 2018) Holding that employee stated claims of disability discrimination and retaliation.
CHURCHILL V. PRINCE GEORGE’S CTY. PUB. SCH.
No. PWG-17-980, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197713 (D. Md. Dec. 1, 2017) Holding that the employee stated a claim of sexual orientation discrimination, sex stereotyping discrimination, and retaliation.