Question

Robert works for a congressional representative and suffers a disabling injury in an automobile accident. Robert cannot work more than 3 hours per day according to his doctor. Weeks later, when he returns to work, he asks for a job accommodation and is told that it can't be done. When he presses the point, his supervisor says the reason is:

A. Congressional staff people aren't covered by the ADA, so they don't have to even discuss his request.
B. The request he has made would exempt him from several of his job's key responsibilities.
C. The request he has made would set a precedent that other representatives' offices would have to follow.
D. Because congressional staff members have to meet the public every day, they can't have people seeing disabled workers in the office. It doesn't look good.

Answer 1

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Robert's employer is required to provide reasonable accommodations unless it poses an undue hardship. Option B could potentially be a valid reason for denial only if his key job responsibilities are essential and cannot be altered.

Step-by-step explanation:

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a crucial piece of civil rights legislation aimed at prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities in various areas, including the workplace. Under the ADA, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities as long as these accommodations do not create an undue hardship for the business.

Given that the congressional representative's office is a covered entity under the act, Robert should be entitled to a reasonable accommodation based on his doctor's recommendation that he should not work more than 3 hours per day. Therefore, option B, where the request exempts him from key job responsibilities, might be a valid reason if these responsibilities are considered essential functions of the job and cannot be restructured or delegated. Option A is incorrect because congressional staff are indeed covered by the ADA. Option C is also incorrect, as one office's accommodations would not necessarily set a precedent for other offices. Lastly, option D is explicitly against ADA provisions as it is discriminatory to suggest that seeing disabled employees in the office is unfavorable.