Heel turn? How a dress code became an ADA problem.

This case started with a pair of Skechers, and will end with a jury trial.

A cocktail server at MGM National Harbor, Rebecca Lopez-Duprey, suffered from foot conditions—Achilles tendonitis and Equinus deformity—that made wearing heels painful and medically inadvisable. Her doctor recommended she wear flat, supportive shoes. Eventually, MGM granted her an ADA accommodation to do just that.

Lopez-Duprey wore Skechers-style black shoes for over two years without issue. Then came a policy change.

In late 2021, MGM issued a memo updating the dress code and specifying which shoes were allowed, even for employees with ADA accommodations. Skechers weren't on the approved list. The company disciplined Lopez-Duprey multiple times, including once for showing up to work in her doctor-recommended sneaker. She protested internally, and her doctor even submitted another note, this time stating she needed those shoes permanently.

MGM terminated her shortly thereafter for violating its appearance standards.

Lopez-Duprey sued for failure to accommodate under the ADA. 

Documentation wins cases

Charles Carroll worked as a high-ranking exec at IDEMIA, the company behind TSA PreCheck. He ran a new initiative called "Trusted Fan" and was involved in renewing a major TSA contract.

He was also in his 60s and had recently been diagnosed with prostate cancer.

A year after disclosing his diagnosis, and after delivering the TSA contract renewal, he was fired. The company said it was due to performance issues: lack of leadership, mishandling the Trusted Fan rollout, and frustrations around the contract renewal process.  

The Sixth Circuit upheld summary judgment for the employer across the board, including on Carroll's disability and age discrimination. Why? One word: documentation.

This is NOT how the ADA is supposed to work

Some federal agencies within the Trump administration have delayed acting on employee requests for reasonable accommodations because they are still figuring out their return-to-office policies.

That's not how the ADA works.

The ADA doesn't allow employers to "wait and see" before engaging in the interactive process. It doesn't allow delays while leadership huddles over long-term telework plans. And it definitely doesn't permit an employer to ignore an accommodation request just because it's inconvenient or politically tricky.

PSA: Get your measles titer checked

I just had measles titer checked—and to my surprise, it came back really negative. That means I either never had the measles vaccine (which I definitely did, as a child) or my immunity has disappeared over time.

This matters because measles is one of the most contagious viruses on the planet. If you're not immune and you're exposed to someone with measles, you have a 90% chance of getting infected. And it's not just a rash and a fever. Measles can cause pneumonia, brain swelling, and even death.

Moreover, we're currently seeing measles outbreaks across the country in places where it hasn't shown up in years. While many adults assume they're protected, as I just learned that may not be the case.

Medical marijuana accommodation is highly state-law dependent

Q: Must an employer accommodate of an employee's legal use of medical marijuana?

A: It depends.

Case in point: Davis v. The Albert M. Higley Co.

Brian Davis, who used legally prescribed medical marijuana to treat his anxiety, depression, and ADHD, sued The Albert M. Higley Co. for wrongful failure to hire under Pennsylvania's Medical Marijuana Act (MMA) and for disability discrimination under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA).

What makes an accommodation "reasonable"?

Let's talk about Nguyen v. Bessent and the IRS's year-long effort to accommodate an employee with medical limitations.

Thuy-Ai Nguyen, an IT specialist at the IRS, requested multiple accommodations related to her severe depression, anxiety, and cognitive impairment. Her requests? A transfer to a different division, formal training, a part-time schedule, and the ability to work from home or transfer to a location with a shorter commute.

The IRS partially granted her requests: It offered her a new assignment with different immediate supervisors, on-the-job training, and a six-month part-time schedule. But it denied her telework request, arguing that in-person training was necessary. They also searched for positions closer to her home but found no vacancies.

Nguyen rejected the offer, arguing it wasn't a "reasonable" accommodation because her higher-level manager remained the same and she still had to commute to the same location.

The court disagreed.

How to respond to the Justice Department's DEI hitlist

"The Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division will investigate, eliminate, and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities in the private sector." 

 

That's the key sentence from a Feb. 5, 2025, memo that Attorney General Pam Bondi sent to all DOJ employees.

What does it mean? No one really knows. What we do know is that diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are top priorities for this administration. The key question is how the administration defines "illegal."

Here's what we can infer so far:

What hiring and employment look like without DEI

What does a country without DEI look like? Some people say that's what they want. No more diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in hiring or the workplace. Just a pure "meritocracy."

So what does that actually look like?

Neurodivergence is not an excuse for racism

"He's on the spectrum" is not an excuse for racism.

I've seen more than one person attempt to justify Elon Musk's Nazi salute, or dismiss it, citing his Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism spectrum disorder.

I call 🐂💩!

Bigotry, racism, and antisemitism are not symptoms of Asperger's or autism. They are, however, hallmarks of being a bigot, racist, or antisemite.

A lesson on ADA compliance

What happens when an employer fails to take an employee's disability seriously? It might look a lot like the case of Sutherland v. Peterson's Oil Service.

This recent First Circuit decision offers a crash course on the perils of ignoring an employee's requests for accommodations—and the consequences of getting it wrong.

ADA covers more than those who are limited in their ability to work

What happens when an employer ignores the definition of "disability" under the ADA? A lawsuit—and a lesson in what not to do. A recent 6th Circuit decision highlights how important it is to get the definition right—and why denying a reasonable accommodation like a job transfer can land you in legal trouble.

The "R-word" is making a comeback

According to Rolling Stone magazine, the "R-word" is making a comeback as part of a hard-right online trend using it to slander those who do not agree with their politics.

The resurgence of the "R-word" as a slur is more than offensive—it's harmful. It perpetuates stigma, dehumanization, and exclusion, particularly for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

This isn't about ignorance. Everyone knows why that word is ugly. Its recent resurgence in mainstream discourse, fueled by social media and some high-profile offenders, is a deliberate attempt to provoke and devalue. It's not just juvenile name-calling; it's a message—one that says some people are less deserving of respect, dignity, or a voice.

"RFK Jr.'s job application: part psych eval and all wrong

"I don't have that much interest in having a sexual experience with another person."

"I believe in things many others don't—like having a 'sixth sense,' clairvoyance, and telepathy.

"As an adolescent, I had bizarre fantasies or preoccupations."

Those are among the odd and inappropriate questions that applicants seeking to work for RFK Jr.'s Department of Health and Human Services must answer as part of the application process. They also appear to be taken from the criteria for a schizotypal personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition.

They are also a big legal no-no.

Spying on your sick employees is a recipe for disaster

Do you remember the episode of The Office where Dwight stakes out Oscar's house to see if he's faking a medical condition and committing insurance fraud?

Believe it or not, something similar is happening in real life at Tesla. The managing director and human resources director of one of its foreign gigafactories recently targeted 30 employees on sick leave for home visits. While the HR director claims the visits had "nothing to do with general suspicion," the managing director has a documented history of intolerance toward factory workers who "couldn't get out of bed."

Needless to say, the employees did not appreciate the visits. "You could just tell by the aggression," the HR director said. Employees slammed doors, threatened to call the police, and questioned why the visits weren't scheduled in advance.

"100% healed" = 100% illegal

The EEOC has sued Navitas Systems for its "100% healed" return to work policy.

The case involves the company's former division controller, who suffered a severe rotator cuff injury and fractured wrist. His doctor cleared him to return to work with restrictions, limiting the use of his injured left arm. Confident that he could still handle all the essential functions of his job with his right arm, he asked to come back to work, despite Navitas's policy. The company, however denied his request and fired him.

"Policies that require an employee to be restriction-free before returning to work run afoul of the ADA," said Miles Uhlar, the local EEOC trial attorney handling the case. "This employee could have performed the essential functions of his position. By strictly applying its '100% release' policy, Navitas violated the ADA."

Meteorologist fired for 'sharing recovery journey publicly' raises issues of disability discrimination

"Thank you for going on this journey with me despite the yucky medical stuff I have going on. I'm happy to announce I am 9 months sober!"

That's what local television meteorologist and personality Hollie Strano wrote on her personal Instagram last month. Eleven days later, her employer, WKYC/Tegna, fired her. (The "yucky medical stuff" she referred to is ovarian cancer.)

"I believe the actions of WKYC and Tegna demonstrate the stigma surrounding addiction that so many in our community experience every day," Strano shared after her termination.

I believe this goes beyond stigma; it looks like disability discrimination.

The interactive process is a two-way street

The interactive process for disability reasonable accommodations is a two-way street, requiring participation from both the employer and the employee. If either party fails to participate or withdraws from the process, that party will likely lose in a subsequent ADA failure-to-accommodate lawsuit.

A recent case, Wilson v. Dept. of Mental Health & Addiction Services, decided by the 6th Circuit, serves as an example.

Temporary impairments as ADA disabilities

Does recovery following surgery qualify as a "disability" under the ADA? Well, it depends.

Consider, for example, the recent court of appeals decision in Long v. KeltanBW. Long worked as a floating teacher in a daycare center owned and operated by KeltanBW. Less than one month after starting her job, Long took time off for liposuction surgery. Upon her return to work eight weeks later, the employer assigned her to the preschool rooms to accommodate her temporary post-surgery lifting restrictions. Within a couple of months, however, KeltanBW fired her for poor attendance. 

Long sued, claiming disability discrimination.

Call me … maybe? 6th Circuit saves FMLA claim of employee who failed to follow employer's call-in rules.

Latrice Crispell, a 23-year employee of FCA working as a floater on its truck assembly line, suffered from major depression and anxiety, which qualified her for intermittent leave under the FMLA. FCA had a strict 30-minute call-in rule, requiring employees to notify their supervisors of any absence at least 30 minutes before their shift, or later with a statement explaining the missed call-in.

Crispell struggled to comply with that rule during severe flare-ups of her condition, which she argued made it impossible for her to call in on time and made her absent or late 15 times during the final three months of her employment. Despite submitting explanations and a doctor's note about how her illness made it impossible for her to comply with the 30-minute rule during flare-ups, FCA disciplined and ultimately terminated her.

Despite the employee failing to meet FCA's call-in requirements for her intermittent leave, the 6th Circuit reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the employer. 

A ruff reasonable accommodation claim

Samantha Howard worked as a pharmacist for Boswell Regional Health Center. She suffers from Type I diabetes along with hypoglycemic unawareness, which prevents her from knowing when her blood sugar dangerously drops. To help manager her blood sugar, she requested a diabetic-alert service dog as a reasonable accommodation. The employer, however, denied the request because of hygiene concerns and risk of contamination to sterile work areas.

The 8th Cir. Court of Appeals heldheld that the employer had lawfully denied Howard's accommodation request for two key reasons: (1) she had performed her essential job functions for more than a year, and therefore the accommodation was not necessary; and (2) the employer had valid and legitimate concerns about contamination and risks to the sterility of the work environment.