For HR and agency decisionmakers:
Connect accommodation and performance management.
A key risk point is performance management. Before initiating or continuing performance‑based actions where medical limitations are known, ensure the accommodation dialogue has been timely and robust. Relying on performance deficiencies that stem from unaddressed medical limitations, can undermine a removal action because the agency may be seen as passing its accommodation obligations and the interactive process. Integrating accommodation steps into performance planning can produce better outcomes and reduce legal exposure.
For federal employees:
Raise limitations early and participate actively.
If a medical condition is affecting your work, alert your supervisor or HR in plain language and explain the functional limitations. You do not need legal jargon to start the process. Providing information about your condition’s impact on work tasks is sufficient to trigger the agency’s duty to engage. Collaborate with your provider to supply relevant restrictions, stay engaged in discussions, and be open to reasonable alternatives.
Learn more about the interactive process from our article: The Interactive Process: A Smart, Lawful Path to Effective Federal Workplace Accommodation.
Common pitfalls for agencies
Treating performance shortfalls as purely disciplinary without first exploring accommodation when medical limitations are known.
Agencies risk converting a medical‑accommodation issue into performance removal action if they continue to measure performance against unmodified standards while aware of medically imposed restrictions.
Waiting for a “formal request” instead of acting on notice.
No formal written request or specific phrase is required to trigger the duty to engage in the interactive process when the agency has actual knowledge of medical conditions affecting work.
Failing to analyze essential functions and limitations.
Management should identify which essential duties are affected, discuss potential accommodation, and seek clarification from healthcare providers when appropriate.
Assuming no accommodation exists without exploring options.
Agencies should explore modifications such as assignments, temporary restructuring, schedule adjustments, light duty, or temporary reassignment before concluding accommodation is unavailable.
Inconsistency across employees.
Evidence that similarly situated employees received accommodation such as alternative assignments or light duty can demonstrate that options existed but were not offered in a given case.
You can contact us 24 hours a day, 7 days a week via phone at 8885294543, by e-mail at info@tullylegal.com or by clicking the button below:
Common pitfalls for employees
Not communicating how a medical condition limits job performance.
Employees need only provide sufficient information to put management on notice that medical conditions are affecting workplace performance and that assistance may be needed.
Withholding or delaying medical clarification.
Employers may request clarification of restrictions on tailoring accommodation, and the process works best when employees cooperate in good faith.
Treating the process as one‑and‑done.
The interactive process is a dialogue that require follow‑up discussions, evaluation of alternatives, and adjustment over time.
How legal counsel can help
Issue‑spotting and early guidance.
Counsel can help agencies and employees recognize when notice has triggered the interactive process and structure a compliant dialogue from the outset.
Process design and documentation.
Advisors can facilitate meetings that focus on essential functions, medical restrictions, and practical options, and ensure decisions are well documented.
Evaluating options and undue hardship.
Experienced counsel can help identify mission‑compatible accommodations and assess whether proposed measures would impose undue hardship.
Resolving impasses.
When discussions stall, counsel can propose alternative solutions or escalation paths to keep the process moving in good faith.
Litigation readiness.
If disputes arise, counsel can align the record with EEOC guidance and applicable precedent recognizing that failure to engage in the interactive process can support Rehabilitation Act claims.
A practical best‑practice checklist
- Recognize the trigger promptly. When management is aware that a medical condition may be affecting job performance, the duty to engage in the interactive process is triggered regardless of formal wording.
- Identify essential functions and limitations. Meet to determine which core duties are affected and what restrictions apply.
- Share information in good faith. Discuss potential accommodation, and request or provide medical clarification as needed.
- Consider a range of accommodations. Evaluate modifications to assignments, temporary restructuring, alternative work, schedule adjustments, light duty, training, or reassignment alternatives.
- Align performance expectations. Avoid measuring performance against unmodified standards that do not account for known medical limitations while accommodations are being evaluated.
- Document the dialogue and decisions. Maintaining records of discussions, options considered, and outcomes helps demonstrate good‑faith compliance.
- Reassess and adjust as needed. If accommodation is not effective, return to the dialogue to consider alternatives rather than ending the process.
- Ensure consistency. Consider how similar cases have been managed to identify available options and maintain equitable practices.
Federal employment is subject to laws and regulations that differ significantly from those in the private sector; consulting with a federal employment lawyer can make all the difference. Tully Rinckey’s team of dedicated federal employment attorneys is available to assist you today. Please call 8885294543 to schedule a consultation, or schedule a consultation online.
Roger Locklear is a Senior Associate with extensive experience in reasonable accommodation and the interactive process. As former Agency Counsel for the Department of Defense and a Reasonable Accommodation Officer for the Department of the Navy, he advised on accommodation requests, Rehabilitation Act compliance, and complex federal employment matters. He now represents federal employees and advises agencies on workplace accommodation and employment law issues.
