The Crawford County Court of Appeals last month affirmed an employer’s summary judgment on claims asserting that the plaintiff had been terminated for requesting a reasonable accommodation. Hall v. Crawford County Job and Family Services, No., 2022-Ohio-1358. The Court held that requesting a reasonable accommodation is not a protected activity under Ohio law which can support a retaliation claim. Rather, denying a reasonable accommodation may be unlawful discrimination, but the request itself is not a protected activity for purposes of a retaliation claim. Further, the Court found that the plaintiff had voluntarily disclosed her disability to her employer and it was justified in requesting a fitness-for-duty examination when she claimed her disability adversely affected her job performance and submitted an FMLA request.
According to the Court’s opinion, the plaintiff voluntarily disclosed
to her supervisor that she suffered from MS which sometimes made her mind foggy
and could impair her job performance. She brought it up again during a March 20 pre-disciplinary
conference and was recommended to apply for FMLA leave. Although she said she objected and did not
require it, she submitted FMLA paperwork on March 26, which did not mention her
MS diagnosis. She was also requested to
submit to a fitness-for-duty examination.
She was given a three-day
suspension and ultimately terminated. She
filed suit, claiming retaliation and improper medical inquiries. The trial court found that she had been provided
with a reasonable accommodation, could not prove causation, etc.
The plaintiff alleged that the employer’s request for a
fitness for duty examination was an improper medical inquiry. However, the court found that the plaintiff
voluntarily disclosed her MS disability and claimed that it could be impairing
her job performance. Moreover, once she
had requested FMLA leave and a reasonable accommodation, the employer was
entitled to request information about the nature and extent of her alleged
disability.
The plaintiff alleged that she was terminated in retaliation
for requesting a reasonable accommodation.
The court found that requesting a reasonable accommodation is not a protected
activity under Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4112 which could support a retaliation
claim. While terminating an employee for
requesting a reasonable accommodation might be unlawful discrimination, it
does not fit within the types of activities that constitute protected conduct
under Ohio law, such as opposing discrimination, testifying, participating in
an investigation, etc.
The plaintiff denied that she had attempted to pursue a
failure-to-accommodate claim, and objected the trial court granting summary
judgment to the employer as though she had done so. The appellate court refused to address this
argument.
NOTICE: This summary is designed merely to inform and alert
you of recent legal developments. It does not constitute legal advice and does
not apply to any particular situation because different facts could lead to
different results. Information here can change or be amended without notice.
Readers should not act upon this information without legal advice. If you have
any questions about anything you have read, you should consult with or retain
an employment attorney.
