Duty to Accommodate vs Undue Hardship in Hard Times

System

This week's Northern Exposure column is about a case in Canada in which the court had to weigh the employer's situation - layoffs and reduced shifts - with an employee's need for an accommodation.

I don't remember seeing this same issue come up in a U.S. court yet but it seems like it's only going to be a matter of time. How should employers in the US deal with this kind of situation and how do you think the courts will look at it?

Here's the Northern Exposure article from our attorney editors at Fasken Martineau in Canada

[url]http://blogs.hrhero.com/northernexposure/2010/10/25/accommodating-disabled-workers-undue-hardship-in-hard-times[/url]

Still Need Coffee

This would be a tough situation for any employer, but in my view, if the accommodation truly is causing an undue economic hardship on the company, I would probably respond the same way Maersk Distribution did. I would look at it in terms of productivity - sometimes an employee who is working a reduced schedule can be just as productive as a full time employee, but if I'm losing money by employing the person, I'd say they'd be a candidate for a layoff.

As for the courts, whether they'd follow the Canadian Supreme Court is anyone's guess - I find that many courts are so pro-employee that it is sometimes pointless to even argue a case.