Just ask the 15 Dunkin' Donuts franchisees that recently agreed to pay $250,000 to settle an EEOC disability discrimination lawsuit.
According to the EEOC, these franchisees maintained a policy that refused to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with medical restrictions. Instead, workers were placed on unpaid, indefinite leave until they could return to work with no restrictions whatsoever. In other words, if an employee wasn't "100% healed," they weren't working.
The EEOC calls this a "100%-healed" policy. The ADA calls it unlawful.
Too many employers mistakenly assume that if an employee has medical restrictions, the safest course is to send them home until they're fully recovered. That instinct is understandable. It's also exactly what the ADA is designed to prevent.
The ADA requires employers to engage in an interactive process with employees seeking accommodations and to conduct an individualized assessment of whether they can perform the essential functions of their jobs with a reasonable accommodation. Sometimes that assessment and interactive process results in modified duties. Sometimes it's a schedule change. Sometimes it's assistive equipment. And yes, sometimes it's a leave of absence.
Leave can absolutely be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. It just can't be the only accommodation you're willing to consider.
An employee with lifting restrictions might still be able to perform the essential functions of a cashier position. An employee recovering from surgery might need a temporary schedule adjustment. An employee with a mobility impairment might need a workstation modification. Automatically placing these employees on unpaid leave skips the interactive process entirely and assumes that disability equals inability.
That's precisely what got these Dunkin' franchisees into trouble.
The EEOC also alleged that employees were effectively forced to resign or were terminated because they couldn't provide a doctor's note releasing them to work without restrictions. That's another hallmark of an unlawful 100%-healed policy. The ADA doesn't require employees to be restriction-free. It requires employers to determine whether employees can perform their jobs with reasonable accommodation.
The agency's settlement announcement contains a quote every employer should tape to its ADA policy manual: "The ADA requires employers to individually assess reasonable accommodations and grant those which do not pose an undue hardship for the employer. Uniform policies eliminating such individual considerations are red flags for ADA violations."
That's the lesson every employer should take from this settlement.
If your handbook, leave policy, or accommodation practices contain language requiring employees to be fully recovered, have no restrictions, or be 100% healed before returning to work, fix it now. Likewise, if your managers routinely respond to medical restrictions by immediately placing employees on unpaid leave without exploring other options, you're creating the same risk that cost these franchisees a quarter-million dollars.
The ADA requires individualized assessments, not automatic decisions. If your default response to workplace restrictions is unpaid leave, you're not engaging in the interactive process. You're building the plaintiff's case for them.
The ADA requires employers to engage in an interactive process with employees seeking accommodations and to conduct an individualized assessment of whether they can perform the essential functions of their jobs with a reasonable accommodation. Sometimes that assessment and interactive process results in modified duties. Sometimes it's a schedule change. Sometimes it's assistive equipment. And yes, sometimes it's a leave of absence.
Leave can absolutely be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. It just can't be the only accommodation you're willing to consider.
An employee with lifting restrictions might still be able to perform the essential functions of a cashier position. An employee recovering from surgery might need a temporary schedule adjustment. An employee with a mobility impairment might need a workstation modification. Automatically placing these employees on unpaid leave skips the interactive process entirely and assumes that disability equals inability.
That's precisely what got these Dunkin' franchisees into trouble.
The EEOC also alleged that employees were effectively forced to resign or were terminated because they couldn't provide a doctor's note releasing them to work without restrictions. That's another hallmark of an unlawful 100%-healed policy. The ADA doesn't require employees to be restriction-free. It requires employers to determine whether employees can perform their jobs with reasonable accommodation.
The agency's settlement announcement contains a quote every employer should tape to its ADA policy manual: "The ADA requires employers to individually assess reasonable accommodations and grant those which do not pose an undue hardship for the employer. Uniform policies eliminating such individual considerations are red flags for ADA violations."
That's the lesson every employer should take from this settlement.
If your handbook, leave policy, or accommodation practices contain language requiring employees to be fully recovered, have no restrictions, or be 100% healed before returning to work, fix it now. Likewise, if your managers routinely respond to medical restrictions by immediately placing employees on unpaid leave without exploring other options, you're creating the same risk that cost these franchisees a quarter-million dollars.
The ADA requires individualized assessments, not automatic decisions. If your default response to workplace restrictions is unpaid leave, you're not engaging in the interactive process. You're building the plaintiff's case for them.