Court of Appeals Affirms Woody Allen - When it Comes to Work, Showing Up Is Essential

05 July 2017 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Authors: Gregory W. McClune

The movie director and comedian Woody Allen is credited with the observation that “Showing up is 80% of life.” A federal court of appeals in New Orleans has gone one step further and ruled that showing up for work is a 100% requirement, at least in most circumstances.

The plaintiff was a litigation attorney employed by the State of Louisiana. She developed serious health conditions due to complications from a kidney transplant. Her employer granted her temporary accommodations to work from home, with the goal of eventually reintegrating back into the workforce. After several months of telecommuting, her employer denied the attorney’s continuing request to work from home, but offered alternative conditional accommodations. She rejected this offer and renewed her request to work from home. When that request was denied, the attorney sued, claiming a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

As we have noted in previous Employment Law Updates, working from home, or “telecommuting” has become an increasingly important feature of working America. Many employees seek out such work because, among other things, it supplies a flexibility that is not always present in the traditional workplace. However, as we have also pointed out, telecommuting is not practical for many jobs and is often undesirable on an indefinite, fulltime basis. Occasionally, an employee will claim that she/he is suffering from a disability that requires him/her to work at home and that the ADA obliges the employer to so accommodate.

The ADA defines a protected “qualified” employee as one who is able to “perform the essential functions” of the job “with or without reasonable accommodation.” The New Orleans court noted that many prior courts had concluded that regular work-site attendance is an essential function of most jobs. Moreover the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which enforces the ADA, recognizes that, for some jobs, the essential duties can only be performed in the workplace and telecommuting may not be feasible.

Interestingly, the New Orleans court noted that many employers have policies permitting telecommuting under certain circumstances and observed that requiring employers to offer the option of unlimited telecommuting to a disabled employee would have a “chilling effect” on such policies.

So the takeaway is this – most of the time “showing up” at work is an “essential function” of the job and an employer can insist on such physical presence. So was Woody Allen right?  Let us say he was 80% right.  As Malcolm Forbes once said: “Presence is more than just being there.” But that’s a subject for another, future ELU.

 

 

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

Insights

Hatch Comments on DNC-Related Construction Projects in Milwaukee
14 June 2019
Milwaukee Business Journal
Bernard Quoted on Debt-Relief Settlement with ITT Tech Lender
14 June 2019
Wall Street Journal
Dodd and Daughter Profiled in Wisconsin Golf
13 June 2019
Wisconsin Golf
Brinckerhoff Comments on SCOTUS Ruling in Patent Case
11 June 2019
Intellectual Property Magazine
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ
Foley's Government Contracts Annual Update
16 October 2019
Liviona, MI