This case caught my eye because I’ve never seen the term “maxiflex schedule” before.  It sounds so…well, extensive and overwhelming.  I’m sure that’s what the employer in Solomon v. Vilsack  thought when it denied the employee’s requested accommodation for this type of schedule, which  involves substantial flexibility in working hours.  The trial court stated that

In our troubled economic times, many employers have focused on making their workforce leaner and more efficient.  This frequently involves raising performance standards for employees.  But it is important to do so in a thoughtful and legally defensible way.

An illustration of this point can be found in the case of Dupont v. Allina Health

One of the most challenging issues that my clients deal with is managing employee leave rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.  Getting employees to come to work on a regular basis can be frustrating – hair-pulling, teeth-gnashing frustrating.  So the recent case of Mecca v. Florida Health

In a happier, pre-ADAAA (Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act) time, I could blithely advise clients that any medical condition that lasted less that 6 months was only temporary, and therefore was not a covered disability under the ADA.  Upon passage of the ADAAA, however, this elegantly simple, bright-line rule no longer applies.  Instead, we

Given all the emphasis on employees’ rights under various laws, employers are sometimes confused about their own rights.  The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a perfect example.  Under the ADA, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities in order to enable them to perform the essential functions of their jobs.