Yahoo! Takes A Step Back – No Telecommuting?

15 March 2013 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Author(s): Carrie Hoffman

Less than a year ago, I blogged about Yahoo!’s headline making hire of a pregnant CEO, Marissa Mayer.  She took an abbreviated leave and worked from home during that abbreviated leave.  Now, despite the technology that permitted her to work from home during that leave, Yahoo! has abolished its telecommuting policy and has required all employees to report to the office.

Can an employer have a ban against telecommuting?  The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) would certainly disagree that an employer can have a blanket ban on telecommuting.  The ADA requires that an employer consider all reasonable accommodations and provide an accommodation that will enable… 

an employee in performing the essential functions of the position. Such things as altering policies concerning food at desks, change in schedules, leaves, reduced hours, modifying duties, etc. have all been found to be reasonable accommodations.  Several courts and the EEOC take the position that where the work is performed is just another policy that may have to be modified for certain jobs and certain employees.

What this means is that before your company implements a blanket prohibition against telecommuting, you should consider your workforce, your corporate culture and the ADA.  A better way to consider banning telecommuting would be the following policy:

The Company generally expects employees to work from their assigned office, but the Company will consider telecommuting requests based on the needs of the business, the nature of the position and applicable law.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services