NEW YORK—Both small and large organizations alike are required to comply with the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). One difficulty employers find in complying with the law is the definition, or lack thereof, of “reasonable accommodation” under the Act. This law was enacted in 1990, and emerged from a movement among the disabled for protection in the employment arena.

The law states that each case should be evaluated on its own merits, as the law does not want an employer to point to a definition and claim it has done everything it has to do. An employer with 23 employees might have to make far less of an accommodation versus an employer with 1,000 employees. At one time, however, it was established that the vast majority of accommodations cost employers no more than $50.

When these situations come up, it is essential under the law that the employer enter into the “interactive” process with the employee.

How is this achieved? The employer and the affected employee must enter into a dialogue with the objective of finding an accommodation that will allow the disabled employee to perform the essential functions of a job in the workplace. Both parties engage in a mutual interest discussion to come up with the best way to accommodate the employee’s disability.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has outlined four steps of the interactive process:
  • Analyze the job involved and determine its purpose and essential functions;
  • Consult with the affected employee to ascertain the job-related limitations imposed by the disability and how those limitations could be overcome with a reasonable accommodation;
  • Identify potential accommodations and assess the effectiveness each would have in enabling the individual to perform the essential functions of the position; and
  • Consider the preference of the individual and select and implement the accommodation that is most appropriate for both the employee and the employer.

Both parties must engage in this process, and it is important that the employer listen and not be unequivocally firm, callous and/or uncompromising. When both parties engage in good faith, there is frequently a solution that will be mutually agreeable to everyone.

—Hedley Lawson, Contributing Editor