Remote Work Conflation: $22.5M Verdict, ADA Risk

April 21, 2026

ADA or FMLA? Why conflating the two creates serious legal risk

Ana Patricia Elizondo Freeman Mathis & Gary + Follow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X ;) Embed

Employees who request to work remotely or seek time away from work for medical reasons may implicate multiple employment statutes, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and, in some circumstances, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). These requests, however, are not interchangeable and trigger different legal obligations. Employers must assess each request individually and respond thoughtfully to avoid potential claims of discrimination, retaliation, or failure to accommodate.

Evaluating a work‑from‑home request

A recent Ohio jury verdict underscores the stakes. The jury awarded a former employee $22.5 million after her employer denied her request to work from home following emergency surgery related to a high‑risk pregnancy. The employee sought temporary remote work to facilitate recovery and avoid strenuous activity. The employer initially denied the request and required her to report to the office. Although the employer reversed course two days later, the employee went into premature labor that same day and the baby later died.

The verdict serves as a stark reminder that how employers respond to accommodation requests, and how quickly, can be just as important as the ultimate decision. Juries increasingly expect employers to meaningfully engage with accommodation requests, particularly where health and pregnancy‑related concerns are involved.

When employers get it wrong: FMLA vs. ADA

Employers frequently misstep by analyzing remote‑work requests through an FMLA lens. That instinct is understandable as medical absences are often governed by the FMLA. FMLA applies only to covered employers and eligible employees and requires a qualifying serious health condition supported by appropriate documentation.

When an employee does not meet FMLA eligibility requirements, or when the medical justification seems insufficient, employers may be tempted to deny the request outright. In doing so, employers often skip a critical step in their analysis.

A request to work remotely is not necessarily a request for leave. When the request is tied to a medical condition, it often implicates the ADA, which does not impose the same eligibility thresholds as the FMLA. Even new employees may be entitled to consideration under the ADA, provided they are otherwise qualified.

Failure to recognize this distinction is a common and costly error.

The ADA requires an interactive process

Under the ADA, an employee is qualified if they can perform the essential functions of their job with or without a reasonable accommodation. When an employer receives a request to work remotely for medical reasons and the employee otherwise falls under the ADA’s definition of disabled, the inquiry should focus on whether the employee can perform those essential functions while working off‑site.

Critically, the ADA requires employers to engage in an interactive process. That means:

• Communicating with the employee;
• Evaluating the specific limitations and job duties at issue; and
• Considering reasonable alternatives where appropriate. An automatic denial, particularly one based on rigid return‑to‑office policies, can support a failure‑to‑accommodate claim.

While an indefinite leave of absence is generally not considered a reasonable accommodation under the ADA, remote work is not a leave of absence at all. The employee remains responsible for performing their job duties and meeting performance expectations. Employers are not required to lower productivity standards, but they must be prepared to articulate why a remote arrangement would prevent the employee from performing essential functions or would impose an undue hardship.

A note on the PWFA

Where pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions are involved, employers should also be mindful of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which imposes affirmative accommodation obligations similar to that of the ADA. Requests that might previously have been dismissed as temporary inconveniences may now require closer scrutiny and accommodation analysis.

Remote work in a post‑COVID world

The post‑COVID workplace has changed employer, and jury, expectations. During the pandemic, many employers successfully operated, and many continue to operate, with remote or hybrid teams. This reality now colors how accommodation requests are perceived.

While employers may lawfully require employees to work from the office, once an employee requests remote work as an accommodation, the employer must evaluate that request under the ADA. That analysis should consider:

• The essential functions of the position;
• Whether those functions can be performed remotely;
• The duration of the request; and
• Whether remote work would impose an undue hardship (must be significant). Failing to conduct that analysis, or defaulting to an FMLA framework, can leave employers defending their decisions before a jury rather than resolving them through a documented, good‑faith process.

Key takeaways for employers

• Do not conflate accommodation requests with leave requests as they trigger different laws and obligations.
• Engage in the interactive process and avoid automatically denying remote‑work requests.
• Focus on essential functions, not assumptions; the question is whether the job can be performed remotely, not whether the employer prefers in‑person work.
• Be especially careful with pregnancy‑related requests as both the ADA and PWFA may apply. In short, employers should carefully analyze the request under the correct statute, and document a thoughtful, individualized response. As recent verdicts demonstrate, juries are paying close attention.

[View source.]

;) ;) Report

Related Posts

• EEOC’s first major DEI enforcement action signals new litigation risk
• NLRB decision involving Harvard highlights tension between union rights and workplace investigation confidentiality
• NLRB quorum restored: What employers need to know

Latest Posts

• ADA or FMLA? Why conflating the two creates serious legal risk
• Ethical ramifications of using AI in attorney-client conversations See more »

©
Freeman Mathis & Gary

Written by:

Freeman Mathis & Gary Contact + Follow Ana Patricia Elizondo + Follow more less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA

• ✔ Increased readership
• ✔ Actionable analytics
• ✔ Ongoing writing guidance Join more than 70,000 authors publishing their insights on JD Supra

Start Publishing »

Published In:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) + Follow Disability Discrimination + Follow Employee Rights + Follow Employer Responsibilities + Follow Employment Discrimination + Follow Essential Functions + Follow Failure to Accommodate + Follow Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) + Follow Interactive Process + Follow Pregnancy + Follow Pregnant Workers Fairness Act + Follow Reasonable Accommodation + Follow Remote Working + Follow Civil Rights + Follow Health + Follow Labor & Employment + Follow more less

Freeman Mathis & Gary on:

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Sign Up Log in ** By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.* - hide - hide