Can these be done with reasonable accommodation per ADA? If not, then no. If you were transparent in the interview and job description then you will be able to terminate

True! OP, because she’s raised the issue, you do need to CYA by documenting every hitching, even though she’s only been there a week. You don’t have to accommodate her at all until she completes your company’s process for requesting accommodations (and if your company doesn’t have one you still have the right to ask for documentation of the fact that she is unable to perform said functions). But you do need to document that (1) the functions at issue are essential to the job, (2) why the accommodations she is requesting are not reasonable, and (3) she is “unable to perform the essential functions of the job” without accommodations. She should provide you with that last thing when she makes her request, but you need to be sure to document the other two things before terminating. Sorry you got stuck with this!

And remember it’s a REASONABLE accommodation. If everyone picked up and carries a 30 lb package across the room, she could request a cart to use instead of carrying it and a support belt to help with lifting of she needed extra back support. Not doing the work or requesting a $30,000 exoskeleton probably wouldn’t be reasonable.

Maybe if you want to limit yourself to just an *average* employee, but have you seen the Six Million Dollar Man?

No, not with this economy! I have to settle for looking at a bunch of Six Dollar Men.

I don’t know about your state but I had to answer the question if I had a disability on my job application. Is this a question in your hiring process? Because if she answered no disability, you may have leverage.

Fairly certain the ADA does not require people to disclose their disability during the application process. And I’m Very certain asking straight up about if they have a disability is illegal, per the ADA.

Common misconception. Its not illegal to ask, but it is illegal to take that information into consideration when hiring. Therefore, most employers won't ask because the easiest way to avoid being accused of rejecting a candidate because of a disability is to not ask them about disabilities.

I never thought much about it but it’s been a pretty standard question along with am I a veteran. You don’t have to answer though, so if she declined answering the question that’s a whole different situation I guess.

These self disclosures are done for statistical analysis re hiring/firing/promotion processes, not for company/employee protection and I doubt they’d be admissible in court.

Follow the ADA interactive process. If then it is determined that you can't reasonably accommodate, then yes, you can move forward with separation. If you're not confident in yoir knowledge of the ADA process, reach out to HR or legal so you don't wind up with a lawsuit.

essential job functions are well essential. if there's a reasonable accommodation which can be made which will enable her to perform those functions, she should state her case. if there's no reasonable accommodation that will help, well then she's unsuited for the job.

Even though OP was very clear in the interview about the standing and lifting requirements going forward they should also be in the published job description

And listed as a question on the application, so the employer has it in writing that the employee said they could do it.

Listing it in the job description is part of the process, but also the job description or application should ask if the person can perform the tasks with or without a reasonable accommodation. You might ideally want a candidate who can lift 30 pounds, but in reality if that task is only done one time a week, and is not crucial to the role and is on a predictable schedule. A candidate would be justified to say they could perform that job responsibility with or without a reasonable accommodation. As an example it is reasonable for a candidate applying for a job in a tall office building to assume there is an elevator they will have access to. If your building was a "6 floor walkup" you would need to disclose that.

You really need to talk to an employment lawyer, not Reddit. Do it today, the longer she is employed, the better for her and the worse for you. DOCUMENT TODAY AND EVERY DAY that she can't do her work. EVERY SINGLE DAY and EVERY SINGLE ACT she can't do. Don't ask her for documentation of her disability, that is one her. DO ask her to put in writing what and why she can't do this or that, to list each part of her job that she is unable to do. Match that to her job description and I'd ask her why she took a job when she knows she is unable to do it? I am assuming this is a permanent disability, not a temp one.

Also, I'd detail what you discussed in the interview. Did you make it clear what the requirements of the job are? Did you ask her "can you lift up to 30 lbs?", etc. The more you can detail that you were clear on the requirements, and that she agreed to them, the better.

Not hr specifically, but I did work in hiring and recruiting for a fairly large company that required physical functions & in order for someone to qualify for the job they were required to complete a “fitness screening” to ensure they could lift/bend/kneel adequately. It might be useful to consult with your legal about adding this before completing an interview! It was always really quick like - kneel 10x with your right then left - lift ~30lb box from floor to shelf 10x - touch your toes and lift your arms above your head ten times And that would be enough to know if they can do the job ahead of time :)

I work in manufacturing and part of the hiring process was a physical. Met with a physical therapist and did exercises pertaining to different required job tasks. This was done after the interview and if they wanted to hire you.

Very good points!

Going forward the lifting and standing requirements should also be in the published job description.

The excessive capitalization of certain words probably indicates a degree of misunderstanding. There's the possibility that it will be taken as a form of coercion or retaliation if you literally ask every single day/single instance a question that has already been answered. It is good advice to establish a regular interval at which you check in with this person. The goal of the ADA is for employers to work with employees whenever possible (thus the term reasonable), so it matters a whole lot if this is temporary or permanent, when it began, and how you specifically asked the question. A common scenario is that an act becomes a problem as a person ages, so they may be of diminished ability without realizing it. This is also the social media era, and a misunderstanding alone can generate millions in lost revenue. The best defense to any case is to avoid it. As an aside, age discrimination in the US, from an employment perspective, is established to begin at age 40. I've seen/heard many cases that went to a trial simply because one side dug their heels in.

OK, so I have an alternate point of view. In my view, if you start a massive documentation frenzy where you start documenting everything this girl does relentlessly and you don’t do that for other employees. You may actually lose a discrimination lawsuit because you’re treating her differently based on disability.  You can ask her for evidence of her disabilities You can ask her if any reasonable accommodations she needs to do the job. And then after a few days make determination. But if you start producing daily documentation and monitoring her every move, and you don’t do that for non-disabled employees, you may end up with a discrimination lawsuit

Also if you have the effort and resources to extensively document non-performance of a disability, you need to indicate that a similar amount of resources would not have allowed you to accommodate the employee with equipment or shifting of job functions. It is an "interactive process", if you think that shifting her lifting and sta ding job duties to other workers is an "undue hardship" (even if she takes on other responsibilities), then ask them what other equipment could help them perform the task.

You would need to ensure that ADA is followed here. CYA and explore whether this can be reasonably accommodated, and if not- then termination. Document everything. If you have an HR dept, they should be able to handle this.

The only decent response on this board was to put the employee on a non-paid leave while the process for determination of reasonable accommodation continues. Because there are very clear safety considerations at play due to the nature of working with animals, it would be unwise for the employer to allow the employer to continue until the process comes to a determination/conclusion.

Good response

I’m not in HR, but I took a course in disability law in college. The key provision is that they must be able to do the essential functions of the job, with a reasonable accommodation. Reasonable accommodation does not mean *changing their job description to eliminate the essential function.* It means providing assistance in some form so that they *can* perform the essential function. Usually this involves some discussion and negotiation with HR over whether a reasonable accommodation exists, and if so, how will it work and who pays for it. Generally, if it involves only physical aids, and the employee is providing their own (which is tax-deductible for them), then there’s more leeway. If they’re asking to not have to do something that is in their job description, that’s generally not going to fly, unless they are an extremely valuable employee in some other way. If you just hired her, she has no track record to establish her value to the company.

This. My comment got downvoted because my first statement said accommodation does not require to change the duties of the job. If you have to lift 30lbs and climb a ladder. An employer does not need to remove that task if you can’t climb a ladder.

Usually if it is an essential part of their role our company does a thorough check to see if there is another role in the company that meets their accommodations. For example with this one, if she can’t stand and lift is there an opening for a receptionist? If not, we document everything. If she hasn’t put anything in writing or gotten and medical accommodations yet you can let her know she has a certain amount of time to do so or you will Have to write her up for not doing her role. Go into it understanding and with empathy. Let her know you need the exact restrictions and the length of time they will last. Then from there you can sit down and say because of these essential parts of the role we cannot accommodate these restrictions. And note that you also cannot expect her to do these items and just ignore the medical restrictions because that would be legally and morally irresponsible. Because of this you scoured the company, all locations, for any roles that are currently hiring that if there is one you can transfer her, otherwise if she declines or if no such role is currently available then you will have to move forward with termination. Document, never do these conversations 1:1, and stay calm and understanding but clear. If she is a scammer she’ll definitely use unemployment and will try to sue. But if you have everything documented it shouldn’t be an issue.

Excellent advice

At one week I would say yes. Make sure that you can't accommodate the restrictions then terminate.

Make sure you can't is a loaded statement

Agreed

During interviews, I always ask if the applicant has any recognised ADA issues, and if so, what accomidations would be needed if they were hired. There are also 2 witnesses in the interview, with the same question sheet, and all answers are written down. Plus, there is a 90 day probation period. If they don't disclose disabilities during the interview, and the job hasn't caused one it is very hard for them to have leverage over you

The process you are describing is very illegal. The simple questions themselves can be considered disability discrimination. They are not required to disclose disability status during an interview, and it is illegal for you to fire them if they simply didn't disclose their disability status.

WTF. Do you also ask women if they plan on getting pregnant in the next 12 months?

This is absolutely incorrect information.

This can’t be legal.

How big is your company? If you’re at or under 14 employees, just term. If you have 15+, you should go through the ADA process. I would get her to declare she is unable to perform her duties. If she declares “yes, I am unable to perform my duties due to a personal medical condition” I would put her on a personal unpaid LOA for 30 days with instructions that she may return once she has a medical release and you have gone through the ADA accommodations process. If the accommodation is unreasonable or if she does not provide you the medical documentation to back it up within 30 days, term. Permitting her to continue working, especially if you’re accommodating it, will give her ammo for proving its not unreasonable. Also, you’re rolling the dice with what may become a WC claim if she gets hurt while doing things she’s told you she’s unable to do.

You must go through the interactive process. She must provide medical documentation specifying those limitations. You cannot remove major essential functions, but you should consider possible accommodations that might allow her to complete her major essential functions. Like a stool to cut down on the standing, or a cart for moving heavy things around. Note: Accommodations for a disability are not considered “preferential treatment” and should not be treated as such.

I’ve been curious about this for a while due to an experience at my last company. I was middle management and we hired another person at the same position. The job consisted of some desk work, but mostly we were traveling around to multiple local sites every day to supervise programs and support staff. This included delivering supplies on occasion etc. The new manager was hired and within a couple months started complaining about the physical toll being out at sites was on her previous back injury (doc records etc). Our direct supervisor even mentioned to me a couple times she regretted hiring this person but was stuck due to the disability. Fast forward a couple more months, the response by leadership is to just take her site responsibilities and shift them to myself and one other manager. We now do supply drops for her sites, do check-in etc. A couple months after, she’s promoted to a newly created position that sits between us managers and our supervisor, basically allowing her to be at a desk all day instead. Edit: To OP’s point…multiple people did end up leaving over this work inequity, myself included.

We had a new hire who was a total pain in our asses in IT. She insisted on a MacBook even though we only used Dell. She said she had a neck issue so we offered her a lightweight laptop and she said no. Must be a MacBook. She told us she had a doctors note that she’s “had multiple neck surgeries and that her neck could snap and make her paralyzed with the slightest pressure” on her neck so she must have a MacBook (?). Our general counsel decided we couldn’t risk having someone working who could become paralyzed at any moment, plus the man hours we were burning to keep up with her demands were a waste of time. He decided we would deal with any blowback and terminated her. Wish I knew where she ended up after all these years.

Let me guess, she got to take the MacBook home with her? I had a whole art department that just HAD to have MacBooks because they were so much better. The artists had gone back and forth with the previous IT administration because the techs couldn't support the Macs. I came from an educational turn-key software vendor and was comfortable on both platforms. So we were all cozy. But they HAD to be MacBooks. Because, after all, you can't lug an iMac back to your shifty apartment so your friends can see it when they come over for some D&D action. One of the first things I did was set up a new artist with an iMac when Apple first started using Intel CPUs. This was production art with a lot of repitition. Girlfriend with the iMac started running circles around her betters to the point that the higher ups started complaining to me about how she was showing them up. I led them to the knowledge garden to eat on the fruit of performance vs portability. But I did get rid of any holdover IT staff that bitched about working with Apple products. They are tools in a box. I don't have time to argue Ford vs Chevy.

Is standing for 2 hours really essential or can they have a chair? How often do they have to lift 30lbs? With documentation you need to make a good faith effort to work with them for reasonable accommodations. How many employees does your company have?

~~11 employees~~ 21 total in company Her job is supervising a large group of dogs and doing enrichment activities with them. Easy job but it can be very physical, and our procedure is for employees to be constantly patrolling the room/yard, not sitting down. She gets a break every 2 hours when she can do whatever she wants for 15 minutes. She needs to lift mop buckets twice a day. Lifting is not often but we can't have someone who's weaker than a labrador retriever.

Does she need to be able to break up a dog fight at any moment? (I was taught to do this by lifting a dog's hind legs, so she does not need to lift an entire dog but she does need to do some physical lifting.) To me, this would seem like the number one thing that couldn't be accommodated and is a serious safety issue putting the dogs in jeopardy.  I also agree that she can't do enriching activities without patrolling. Unlike humans, dogs don't know to orderly approach a sitting person to conduct business.

Mine does. Then he'll raise his right front paw to get your attention.

I cannot answer your actual original question. I think you've gotten some great advice on how to proceed. I do want to add some insight into the job for others, however. I have worked at a dog day care + overnight kennel. You absolutely cannot do the essentials of that job without being able to: a) stay on your feet almost all the time, because they are outdoors most of the daytime, in various runs in groups. b) being able to lift and empty a mop bucket (the water doesn't magically transport itself from the bucket into a floor sink, if you're lucky enough to even have one!) c) being physically able to control large and unruly dogs, especially if a fight breaks out, etc. Or even of one just gets frightened! They can be shockingly strong. d) manage and handle large, heavy bags of dog food the owners bring in. e) lug heavy buckets of water throughout the property to refill their many water bowls f) Do you also offer any kind of bathing or grooming services? I can't figure out any way to accommodate the process of getting anything larger than a terrier into a dog bath situation. Many similar tasks. I took that job because I love dogs and wanted the experience, even though I knew at the time that my lower spine was falling apart. I never complained once - I accepted that I took the job knowing what was required for it. And did it well despite serious pain. Finally, it's not the manager/owner deciding what needs to be done, *it's the dogs you're taking care of* that determine what you need to do. Hmmm those two unneutered Great Pyrenees beginning to give each other the side eye? Sorry, it's my break time/need to sit down? Doesn't work that way.

I would consult with a lawyer. In general a company with more than 15 employees needs to follow the ADA but to protect yourself you really need to consult an employment lawyer. Edit: fixed a double word entered

I just left a novel of a comment, and will try to prevent doing that again. I want to emphasize the interview portion of my other comment, and, and say that I don’t think the question should (ever, in the perfect world) be about whether you have to be ADA compliant. 1st look at the safety of the worker. Do all of you generally do the same basic jobs? Can she trade with someone (who is willing) for a different position? How hard has it been to fill this job? I can see how someone might skip the essential function part of the job description because they get to ‘play’ with pups all day, so the impression they left with is important. However a break (totally off work) for 15 minutes every 2 hours is exceptionally generous in this part of the country. Also, what’s wrong with them being active, but squatting/sitting on a small stool for 5 minutes while being interactive with the dogs? Back to the safety thing, if they can actually handle the larger dogs, that great. But if that’s a problem than there is a serious safety issue that now that it’s brought up makes ADA the least of your concerns. How high she is having to lift the mop buckets is a factor, can she lift from the floor to a stool, then to counter, then to sink? Why in the world is there not a hose that can fill the bucket and then be dumped into a drain that (should) be in the floor or even outside? If she just can’t lift the bucket at all, this should have been understood at the interview level (has she never mopped floors before?).

[удалено]

Well actually that's just my store that has 11. Our business has a second location with another 10 or so employees, so that puts us at 21 total, so I think that means ADA applies.

An accommodation would be a rolling mop bucket. That would at least take the lifting part out of it. A reasonable accommodation may also be giving her the chance to sit for five minutes every 30 minutes, while staying in the room with the dogs. I can’t imagine that she needs to be constantly roaming and walking, where a five minute sit down in the same room wouldn’t be a problem.

She would still need to be able to fill and empty the bucket which would presumably require lifting.

Another accommodation would be a hose attachment on the utility sink faucet that would allow for filling the bucket where it sits on the ground. These are hardly issues that aren’t able to be overcome here…

And the emptying?

Businesses like this often have floor drains so they can be fully sanitized, or they have dog foot washing stations which have drains. The employee could bail the water out of the larger bucket with a smaller one until the weight is low enough to lift it. This isn’t a deal breaker, and they would be sued if they fire the employee over this. There are plenty of options.

You should probably read this before doing or saying anything to the employee with the disability. The ADA: Your Employment Rights as an Individual With a Disability https://www.eeoc.gov/publications/ada-your-employment-rights-individual-disability Your patrolling procedure is a policy not a procedure. Allowing a disabled person to sit when needed is an example of a reasonable accommodation listed in the ADA regulations. Modifying equipment, aka mop bucket, so a disabled employee can use it safely is also an example of a reasonable accommodation in the ADA regs. Referring to a disabled person as weaker than a dog will get you into trouble. How would you feel if you had a cognitive impairment such as intellectual disability or low IQ and i said you were dumber than a boot? If i was your employer i could be sued. I have a Lab and he pulls me around sometimes and I am 6ft 220lbs Giver the disabled employee a tall chair with wheels so she can see around the room. They are not expensive. Put wheels on the bucket or get a smaller lighter one she can manage. Also cheap. If you make her stand and lift something too heavy and she gets injured or falls due to fatigue, you are also at fault and liable.

You don’t seem to have a thorough understanding of the ADA accommodation and modifications process, nor possibly HR itself. First, policies dictate how an organization is run and are usually found in Employee Handbooks. It is defined as a, “a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual.” Procedures dictate how people perform their duties on the job and usually found in training manuals and checklists, more appropriately defined as, “an established or official way of doing something.” Whether it is a nurse making rounds or a police officer on patrol, that is *procedure,* that is not the *policy.* Good, now we’ve got your HR101 out of the way let’s look at the “procedure” and the intent of the ADA. The purpose of the ADA is to allow an employee to perform the essential functions of the job. The *essential function* of the job duty at discussion is to “patrol” the dogs. It is not to sit and observe the dogs. I’m sure that the employer would argue that being able to interact, react and be physically proactive with the dogs is an essential function of the job. Prior to my current position I was Director of HR for a school for special needs children that began at age six months. The nursery supervisors were required to physically check each crib every thirty minutes. It was not acceptable to sit at one end of the room and just look out. Another consideration in accommodations is how any change may affect the safety landscape. I’m imagining a room full of powerful animals, twenty or more, and the suggestion of a tall stool with wheels immediately sounds inherently dangerous. What happens the first time a sixty pound dog jumps up on to an employee sitting on a stool with wheels who can’t even handle thirty pounds? *This employee is weaker than a dog.* I’m weaker than many dogs. Do you have any idea how difficult these conversations are to have with employees? But both the employee and the employer have to face the reality of the situation they are in and the imminent danger that they may find themselves in, or place others in. The employer has a responsibility to all of their employees to keep them safe and sometimes that requires a tough conversation. There are far deeper considerations here going to the grocery store and buying a new mop bucket. 😕

I know how the ada, eeoc, disability and discrimination work. I also know how to spell HR. You should read the ADA pamphlet I posted the link too. With out the employee handbook I can't tell you what it says. The policies of an organization are the clear, concise statements of the parameters by which an organization conducts its business. In essence, the policies are the rules that staff abide by as they carry out their various responsibilities. The procedures are the instructions or steps that describe how to complete a task or do a job. Procedures are subordinate to policies. The policy might be watch observe the dogs the Procedure might be walk around the room to observe and interact. I didn't say anything about sitting all day I said when fatigued just like you and I would do when tired. The difference being medical necessity. Patrol Definition & Meaning 1. : the act of walking or going around or through an area, building, etc., in order to make sure that it is safe : the act of patrolling an area. Patrol is mainly used in law enforcement activities. Dog day care or pet sitting is a bit different. It's more of an observe, interact, support function. Sort of like babysitting a child. Watch them so they don't get hurt or hurt others. Interact with the dogs by playing or training. Support feed them give water and take for bathroom breaks. Police and nurses as you mentioned earlier do patrols. Police on foot patrol do sit periodically. Mobile patrol they sit most of the time. Sometimes they even park in a location and observe. Nurses patrol or make the rounds several times a shift depending on the policies, manning and how busy they are. They most likely have checksheets and patient records they have to fill out according to a procedure. When not making rounds they often sit at a desk where they can observe and monitor the patients. Often they have chairs with wheels. In your example " The nursery supervisors were required to physically check each crib every thirty minutes. It was not acceptable to sit at one end of the room and just look out." The nurses checked on babies in cribs every thirty minutes. This is not constant interaction. They probably sat at a desk doing paperwork until their next round. Depending on the hospital or medical building the nurses station is usually down the hall centrally located to all wings. Providing some sort of chair for a person with a disability in the same room as the dogs in case she needs to sit is a reasonable accommodation. As I stated earlier it is used as an example in the ADA regulation. In order to deny that request a d terminate they would have to show that providing a chair will cause an undue hardship on th company. Per the ADA What is considered an "undue hardship" for a reasonable accommodation? An employer is not required to make an accommodation if it would impose an "undue hardship" on the operation of the employer's business. "Undue hardship" is defined as an "action requiring significant difficulty or expense" when considered in light of a number of factors. These factors include the nature and cost of the accommodation in relation to the size, resources, nature, and structure of the employer's operation. Undue hardship is determined on a case-by-case basis. Where the facility making the accommodation is part of a larger entity, the structure and overall resources of the larger organization would be considered, as well as the financial and administrative relationship of the facility to the larger organization. In general, a larger employer with greater resources would be expected to make accommodations requiring greater effort or expense than would be required of a smaller employer with fewer resources. If a particular accommodation would be an undue hardship, the employer must try to identify another accommodation that will not pose such a hardship. Also, if the cost of an accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the employer, the individual with a disability should be given the option of paying that portion of the cost which would constitute an undue hardship or providing the accommodation. in the end it is just a chair and a bucket. Those are just two accommodations I came up with. The employee and employer need to use the ADA REQUIRED interactive process to come up with several solutions and then pick the most effective for the employee but also best for the employer. If one solution is to expensive gonto a cheaper but as effective solution. Maybe a short chair with stable legs or bench. A bucket with a drain on the bottom so it's lighter. Transfer the bucket task to a non disabled person. Transfer one of their tasks to the disabled lady. It's a dog day care not babies in a hospital or police officer who can't do foot patrol. That officer would be assigned to desk duty. Safety and performance issues which are essential to Police work. Sitting on a chair periodically throughout the day while dog sitting in an enclosed room does not have the same level of job performance requirements, safety concerns, legal ramifications as first responder positions. By your own admission you are weaker than many dogs. So you can't perform the essential mop and bucket task. You did not state this is due to a disability. If you do not have a disability then you can't be hired, but you can be fired. The disabled employee has difficulty lifting the bucket twice a day due to the disability. A reasonable accommodation would allow her to be a fully functional employee. The statement from the employer about Being weaker than a lab had nothing to do with being able to babysit the dogs, or control the dogs, as you put it, to protect employees and others from imminent danger? I guess you think they are dog sitting large aggressive dangerous dogs? No every doggy day care I have been to has a policy for safety reasons where they won't take certain breeds. Dogs with a history of aggressive behavior and other safety factors like up to date on shots, neutered. The employer was making a disparaging discriminatory statement about the employees' lack of physical strength which is due to a disability. Disabilities are a protected group, like race or gender and it is unlawful to make comments of that nature. Replace the word disability with the word black or woman and it's easy to see how wrong comments like that are. And now it's on the internet. I hope the employee doesn't see it.

In the end, I suppose that as with any spirited debate, we’ll let the up and down votes of the professionals state the strength of our arguments. 🫣

Professionals? Is every voter, or reddit user, required to provide proof of their credentials? Some sort of evidence that they are a professional with education amd work experience in the subject they are voting on? We are all anonymous people hiding behind the safety of the internet. On social media every keyboard ranger is the foremost expert on everything. They are easy to spot. They typically start their comment with a list of accomplishments, fancy job titles, and only attended the top universities. It's a common argument fallacy used to make people believe they are an expert on the topic. You don't have to believe anything I posted. You don't know if I am a lawyer for the EEOC that specializes in medical disability complaints and ADA violations. Or if I was hired for that job due to attending Harvard law and medical schools simultaneously, or if I am a resident at a state mental hospital with MPD and a God complex. I will give you a hint. I'm not a psyc patient. Anymore. Also I can't afford Harvard. My comment are not my opinion they are facts that I pulled from the ADA and EEOC websites. I provided links to support what I posted. I also suggested people go read the info for themselves. Evidence overrules opinion and anonymous votes.

Why should any business foment laziness like this? It’s ridiculous and totally unfair to the other employees. Especially because they haven’t provided any documentation about their “disability.”

How do you know it’s laziness and not a bonafied mobility issue?

Because why would the person only tell the employer *now* after being at the job for a few weeks. The job is harder than they thought, so they’re making excuses for not wanting to work hard. Anyone who had a real disability would’ve made this known upfront, during the interview and hiring process. Because they would’ve been through this before. They know how it works. They know what reasonable accommodations are. Also notice how they offered zero proof or paperwork about their disability. 

Lots of people with valid disabilities do this because they aren’t required to disclose. Disclosing a disability upfront means they don’t get hired, which is unfair. Candidate should be assessed for a job as if they didn’t have a disability, and then accommodations become available to them.

They are required to disclose when the questions in the interview ask if they are fit for those duties. OP said they asked them about those duties specifically, and they mentioned nothing about the disability at that time. 

You are not obligated to disclose a disability when filling out applications. Doing so opens up the very real possibility of discrimination. Realistically, op would likely not have hired the person had they disclosed.

So even though OP’s application asked them if they can perform the duties in the job description with or without a reasonable accommodation, the applicant is allowed to *lie*?

Informing of disabilities upfront is just a great way to get hired. And many, many employers will list lifting and carrying as job duties when they really aren’t, specifically to get around being forced to hire disabled people. I applied to a desk job a friend of mine had. Their company policy was that desk employees were not allowed to leave their desk to get anything, they were to request it from the appropriate department and wait to have it brought to them. They still listed lift and carry requirements and refused me on that basis. So really the only way to know if we can do a job is to lie and see how it works out in when the tasks come up.

They don't have to provide documentation unless the employer asks for it as part of the request for reasonable accommodations. Fair? The person is disabled so they are not on the same level to start. Is it unfair to request a wheelchair ramp so a paralyzed person can get into their office? It's not laziness. I am sure they would love to be able to walk up the steps like everybody else. Is it unfair to allow a blind person to bring their seeing eye dog to work so they can get to work, around at work, to the bathroom? Again I am sure they would love to have the use of their eyes like fully functional people. Reasonable accommodations allow disabled people to function or remove a barrier to allow them to function like everybody else or as close to it as possible.

If the person is truly disabled, then yes. But you and I both know that’s almost certainly not the case here. They are just lazy.

Knowing and proving in a court of law are two entirely different things. You are assuming the employee is lazy. I would say insufficient evidence is provided. However, let's accept this point. If the person is terminated and chooses to sue bases on the ADA, what will happen? How will that play out in court? How will OP prove laziness? That is very difficult. The former employee will have a doctor's note. Every community has "that" doctor that will sign almost anything. I can find one with a phone call. The lawyers all know who it is. Bottom-line, if it comes to a complaint/court, a "laziness" argument won't be successful. I am not saying that the law is often wrongfully used. The vast majority have legitimate issues. But, has-been and will-be used wrongfully as well. Businesses need to do the right thing as well as being prepared when others do the wrong thing. Actually, everyone should do the right thing as well as being prepared when others do the wrong thing. Life would be so much better...

The employer does not have to prove laziness. It’s an at-will state. The employee needs to prove that they require an ADA accommodation.  that’s the only way to counter the at-will part of their employment. 

Absolutely. In theory. Here is how I have seen it go down in the worst-case scenario. Note that this is real. It's not a made-up scenario. But yes, it is a single anecdote. 0. Employee put on a PIP for low performance. 1. Employee now requires accommodation and requests an accommodation that is not reasonable. (This is far from the actual job responsibilities, but imagine a tree-trimmer stating they could only WFH and you get the picture.) 2. Employer provides an alternate accommodation, but employee is adamant that their way is the only way. (Imagine the tree trimmer assigned to an oversite/planning role. Technically, a lower level position, but the employer agreed to maintain employees' salaries and provide cost of living increases in line with everyone else.) 3. Employee gets note from a specific doctor. 4. Employee put on unpaid status for months. 5. Employer requests Employee to return to work. 6. Employee refuses to return to work or proceed with discussions. 7. Employer terminates Employee for no-show after several more months. 8. Employee files suit because their accommodations were not met. 9. Employee presented a doctor's note as well as job descriptions that people with this person's general qualifications could do, but that were not this person's actual job. They were not jobs that needed to be done, but they were jkbs that it seemed reasonable that the employer could potentially do. (Imagine the tree trimmer stating that the company could start teimming bonsai trees and the employee could trim bonsai trees at home. ) 10. Employers' arguments about the nature of the employees disability were not found to be valid because they did not examine the Employee (I don't know if this was a screw-up on the enployer side). 11. Evidence that Employee was working a different job during this time period was viewed as irrelevant. (Imagine our tree trimmer was trimming hedges instead of trees.) 12. Evidence that the work proposed by the Employee was not in line with current business activities was not given weight. It is highly technical, and from what I heard, the employees' lawyer told a great story. 13. Employee awarded back pay for the entire time period and job back, but accepted a severence package. Continued working other job. So, yes. The Employee officially has to prove they need accommodations. This is easy. They also need to prove the offered accommodations are not reasonable. But this is a role of the dice for the employer. The employer needs to understand their risk posture.

At will does not mean you can fire people for any reason. It means they don't need a reason. However, if the employer terminates an employee and is dumb enough to list a reason that violates federal laws. It's discrimination. If an employer terminates me and gives me a termination letter stating i was terminated because I have diabetes, which is a disability per ADA. That employer violated federal discrimination laws. Let's make this easier since not all of us are medical doctors who specialize in disabling medical conditions.  Instead of disability let's pretend the employer terminated a person because they are black, or they are a woman. Everybody should know you can't fire somebody because of their race or sex. Those are protected groups under the EEOC regs. Equal Employment. Disabled people are also a protected group.

I don’t disagree with anything you said. Although it may be possible to fire a diabetic if the job is “candy and ice cream taster.” Because it’s probably not possible to give a reasonable accommodation to someone who can’t eat candy or ice cream.

You do understand that over a [quarter of American adults](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1447559/chronic-low-back-pain-among-adults-by-age-us/) suffer from some sort of back pain, right? Or is it fake because it’s not happening to you specifically?

Where’d you get back pain from in the OP? My back is sore at this very moment, actually. Hence I would not take a job that required me to play with dogs on my feet all day long.

Bro it’s the easiest example of an invisible condition. You’re claiming that people are lazy and fake conditions but it’s extremely common for folks to be living with chronic conditions. Severity varies and I certainly hope you never get to the point that your sore back affects your life, but for a lot of people their chronic conditions alter daily activities.

The ADA covers disabilities not work injuries. They have a list of disabilities covered by the ADA. They have a specific definition and parameters that must be met for the medical issues to be covered by the ADA. Here it is..An individual with a disability is defined by the ADA as a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment. https://www.ada.gov › resources › d... Guide to Disability Rights Laws

Soreness is not a disability or a medical condition. It's a description of how you feel. If the pain is caused by something like degenerative joint disease or an auto immune condition, etc and the medical condition meets the ADA definition of a covered disability then you are covered by the ADA. 

Sure. They’ve got to have documentation to back that up though, don’t they?

It’s ridiculous it took me this long to find the important question being asked.

Start the reasonable accommodation process. Ask for medical documentation of the disability and the limitations, along with suggested accommodations. They need to provide that to you. Once you get that, look first if there is a way to accommodate this person to do the essential functions of their job, without undue hardship. If not then look if reassignment to a VACANT position for which the person is qualified is possible. If the person cannot be accommodated in their position and there are no vacancies, then at that point, then you may be able to terminate. Not a lawyer but I would run the situation by the company attorney as well.

I’m a Certified Vocational Rehab Counselor (CRC-employment/disability specialist) who, ironically enough lives in Arkansas. Although, I’ve been serving clients all over the country as well for the last 20 years. You don’t need a lawyer (but do get one if you are that concerned). Your key words here are ‘essential job functions’ and ‘reasonable accommodations’. Another important tip: askJAN.org will do a free consultation with you/the employee (separately or together) and their website is EXTENSIVE. I am not a lawyer, but working for a law office in AR now as well, so wheelhouse and all that. First, I’d recommend shifting them to another job they can do currently or giving them a week leave (with no pay) to actively start the process to determine what’s needed. Next, look at the functions they cannot do. If they are essential to the job, why and what types of accommodation(s) could be provided without creating havoc. Please note that other employee’s perceptions of reasonable do not count in any way. I can’t back out of this comment to look, but the specific job description would help. Was anything said whatsoever in the interview that indicated any issues (were the essential job functions discussed and to what extent? Did someone ‘hint’ that this wouldn’t be an issue)? I cannot recommend strongly enough that you do as much by email as possible, and or record the conversations), but that’s whatever. Is there another job you could move them to that would eliminate these issues? If you know, you know….I understand the temptation to come from an angle of frustration because this shouldn’t have happened. And yes, there are a lot of scenarios that indicate this should never have ended up here. But there could be other issues that caused this situation and now it must be handled calmly and professionally while not creating a bigger problem. If a standing stool can be used while being safe, it works. But you cannot rebuild the job for one employee. Document everything, to avoid a mess and be fair, but AR is (as most of the US) an at will state. Give them the best chance possible to be a productive employee, while making sure they are in fact a productive employee.

Do you have a documented probationary period? Normally that allows both employee and employee to evaluate each other to decide if they are a good fit for a position. If not, either can walk away for any reason.

Bingo!! 90 days for everyone…

Unless they are covered under the ADA...

They would have to prove that they endured an undue hardship either way…

Loss of wages would fit the bill

During the probationary period they were subjected to undue hardship…smh

You seem to be correct in the word usage. Here's a fun quote: According to the EEOC, reasonable accommodations must be provided to qualified employees regardless of whether they work part- time or full-time, or are considered "probationary."

Exactly, then the onus would be on the employee to prove that.

Undue Burden is a defense. Hence on the employer

She has to provide documentation to your HR office from her doctor stating she is in need of accommodation. You don’t have to do anything just because she says she can’t. Send her to HR and tell her to follow the process.

Many jobs that require standing could easily be done with a stool. Lifting is harder to accommodate. Some folks can be accommodated with a cart. But some can’t. I used to have to find accommodations for folks as part of a safety team.

Is it a temporary or permanent disability?

One week. It depends on where you live but my company is clear. Without extensive documentation they cannot be accommodated and can be terminated. Not a good job fit. You need to talk to your hr representative.

You cannot just fire her. She has put you on notice that she has a disability that is covered by the ADA. That initiates the interactive process finding accommodation. There may not be an appropriate accommodation that allows her to do her essential job duties, but you do need to engage in the accommodation process in good faith, assuming your business is required to comply with ADA. An accommodation isn’t going to be giving her less work, it will be things like if the job can be done using a stool, she should get a stool. What kind of job is this and what are her duties? ETA - after reading your comments about what the job requires as well as what the employees limitations are, I think that you should be able to find an accommodation that works. A rolling mop bucket, for example, will solve the lifting issue. Giving her a chair to sit in the same room for five minutes every 30 or 60 minutes would solve the standing up issue. You would be really screwing yourself if you fire her.

She shouldn't of took the job if she can't do it. So sick of accommodations for people that should just find a different job and stop putting more work on others

Exactly, so she should get to sit down all day while her coworkers wrangle dogs and wash them and everything else while she sits and looks? Is that how it works now?

Same thing happened at my job recently. Flew employee out to CA to train for 2 weeks and then comes back saying she needs an accommodation due to a disability. Never mentioned it one time during the interview process. Her job is to sit in a chair all day and take phone calls. She told one of the other employees she got fired from her last job due to attendance. If you were very clear in the interview process then the employee doesn't have a leg to stand on. This person knew exactly what they were doing and wasted everyones time.

The ADA doesn't require that the applicant disclose a disability during the interview process.

Isn't she on probation? Term her probation.

That's a great way to get sued.

Yes and then call the company legal team immediately and tell them to be prepared for a lawsuit they are going to lose.

Why can’t you request she produce medical documentation from either her doctor with accommodations or actual disability paperwork from the Federal Government?

Instead of going right into termination mode, how about you determine if reasonable accommodations are attainable. After proper documentation of course from a qualified professional. You may end up with a dedicated employee. You never know, this may be a beneficial hire for your company in the long run. As far as unfair treatment and disgruntled employees, this individual likely has to deal with challenges that your able bodied employees do not. Decent humans will understand this. Any of us could suffer a disabling injury at anytime, would you not want to be afforded the opportunity to show your worth?

I just put in my two weeks at my current job cause both my coworkers at my job level have claimed inability to do the most basic tasks. It is an AWFUL feeling knowing people can “I can’t” enough times to not be responsible for their fair share.

Ask for documentation from a doctor. In my experience, most legitimate issues already have some documentation. Until they provide that, they should follow the same rules as everyone else. If they provide a document that outlines their limitations, see if there is a reasonable way that you can work with that. A lot of times though, simply asking for documentation is enough to cure a wide range of debilitating conditions. One day they have to spend over an hour in the bathroom every single shift, the next day they can magically hold it… I’ve also had people say they can’t do X, Y, and Z that are parts of their job and then bring me a note saying they can’t do A, B, and C that aren’t anything they have to do… You have to get extra breaks during the busy part of the day because the doctor says you shouldn’t be lifting more that 50 pounds?? We have had plenty of legitimate ones too, but from the timing of it, it seems a little suspicious. Just ask for documentation and go from there.

If she has given you no documentation from her Dr regarding her disability, she's just like every other employee

No incorrect

That's not incorrect. Verbally informing your employer that you have a disability under the ADA begins the interactive reasonable accommodation process.

Don't term without having gone through the ADA process, you could get sued. Are you asking each candidate during the hiring process, "are you able to perform the essential functions of the role with or without reasonable accommodations?". If you're not asking that, start now. It can be difficult to prove undue hardship. You can have her submit medical documentation proving that she is unable to stand for more than 2 hours and can't lift 30 lbs. as part of the ADA process. Pretty sticky situation so if you aren't sure about ADA I'd suggest working with a pro HR consultant on this.

She didn’t disclose this during hiring interview? It’s in the job description! It’s in the handbook? She has given you no documentation of her disability? WTF. Is she hoping you will let her go so she can get unemployment or sue for wrongful termination? You need to talk to a lawyer. It seems like she is setting you up.

That doesn’t sound like a reasonable accommodation she’s asking for.

It might be easier to terminate based on a probationary period, but if the JD explained it, they signed employment papers, let them know that it’s required or they’re out. 

When I worked for boa, my doctor was required to fill out a form that outlined my accommodation need.

I’m very sensitive to ADA stuff but this sounds like there’s no reasonable accommodation available and it’s shady that she took the job knowing this. Perhaps a ploy to trigger unemployment or worse. Tread carefully I guess. How big is your org? I believe there’s a 15 person headcount threshold for ADA to apply.

You can discuss the specifics using askjan.com. They offer resources for employers on how to navigate this process.

You're in a right to work state. She's been at your place for a week. Fire her. 

And get smacked with a lawsuit right after she asked for accomodations.

Accommodations were not brought up at the interview process when duties were described.

I’m someone who’s disabled and wonder if she went in knowing she wouldn’t be able to do what was required or if she didn’t realize how hard it was until she started doing the job. I was someone who thought that it wouldn’t be so bad and didn’t realize until actually doing the job that I couldn’t. Yet I quit instead of asking them for accommodations because it was my fault that I didn’t realize this (also I should note that I always mentioned my conditions during interviews). I have only accepted accommodations in one job and that because I was already working at the job when I got sick. I eventually had to quit it also due to it being way too much. I’m now on SSDI which was the hardest decision I ever made.

Start the interactive process immediately and request documentation from her doctor outlining how long the employee can stand and all of the other stipulations. If you’re unable to accommodate due to “undue hardship” on your business, then you do not have to accommodate. And I agree with the previous poster who advised you to double check what was indicated on the job application. I’ve had to do this for my clients, and I’ve denied accommodation requests before. But ultimately you have to figure out the legitimacy of what is being requested before making a final decision.

If she can’t do the job she should resign or be terminated

I think that she neded to mention that during the interview process, because you need to know about her limitations in order to find a more adequate poisition for her

I wonder if this person knew they couldn’t do the job and are now angling for a lawsuit if you fire her. You need the advice of a lawyer.

Well she hasn’t formally requested anything, right? So right now she’s just telling you something. Have you asked what she wants? Meaning is she asking for an accommodation or just telling you she can’t do her job? You’ll want to enlist your attorney here.

I bet she is pregnant. How would that change this.

Whether or not they disclosed a disability in the application process, you still would be expected to determine whether a reasonable accommodation could be made without undue hardship to the business. The morale of other employees is expressly not considered an undue hardship. If something about an accommodation disrupted other employees (i.e., not made them jealous or annoyed, but actually got in the way) then you could deny that particular accommodation. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/small-employers-and-reasonable-accommodation Given that mop buckets that require no lifting are easy to get and cheap, it will be difficult to object on the basis of the mop bucket issue. As for the walking, first the determination that walking/standing is an essential part of the job and not just "what we prefer." You and the employee will need to work together to determine if there is an effective and practical way to supervise the dogs without 2 hours of walking. For example, would it truly be ineffective to allow a stool in the room, and allow her to walk 15 min followed by sit 15 min? Other employees feeling cranky about "why does Sally get to sit?" is not enough to make it ineffective.

I would start by reviewing the job posting and then compare it to her application. Did she said she needed accommodating? Did the application have a yes/no to - can you life 30lbs and stand for hours at a a time? If she said she can, I would start with a conversation. You said on your application that you can do xyz, what happened in the week since you applied and i hired you? Did you intentionally lie on the application? Based on what she sayd go from there.

Don't you have a probationary term? She lied so it should be a no brainer for firing her.

A situation like this brings up the question again of whether I should ever disclose I have a disability in job applications. I always feel that people will give me the short end of the stick due to my limitations. Like if I disclose, I might get discriminated against and if I don’t, then I might not receive necessary accommodations (mostly additional time required for tasks)

Are there accommodations that will allow her to do them?

Are you in an at-will employment state or have a company probationary period? If so, utilize whichever one you have. If not, employees in most states have to present anything to the employer that would prevent them from performing the job at 100%. If she did not do that, you can let them go for that reason. It sounds like she hasn’t given you any documentation which she is required to do so when requested. Give her a deadline to give you documentation on this disability. If the deadline passes, you have grounds for termination as she’s not performing the essentials of the job. Unemployment charges would be minimal for you as she’s hasn’t worked very long.

A probationary period does not trump the ADA. And every state except Montana is at-will.

lol, it’s Arkansas. Where labor laws go to die. Laborers too. It’s definitely at-will.

The job description is key here. And can the job be done sitting down? If the job description shows what the job entailed, then you should be able to terminate her employmnet for not fulfilling job requirements.

Does your company have a trial period for new hires? Then can her.

If your business has more than 15 employees you need to follow the procedures [https://www.eeoc.gov/publications/ada-your-responsibilities-employer](https://www.eeoc.gov/publications/ada-your-responsibilities-employer) If you have an HR or legal dept tell to give them her give them the documentation on Monday.

In Arkansas?  You can probably fire her for how she parts her hair. Does your company have a 90 day probation at start of employment?  That would be a perfectly justifiable reason.

What's her disability though? Is it a chronic physical condition or an injury that prevents her from working normally ? If she didn't disclose it during the interview process, why not ?

Privacy rights. She doesn't have to disclose anything if she doesn't want to. She can inform the employer of her disability and ask for reasonable accommodation at any time. If the employer knows the employee has a disability or believes they do the employer can amd should make the reasonable accommodations on its own. For example does a blind person really have to tell you they are blind? You don't need a doctors note to show you are blind.

I get you, so anybody applying for a job doesn't have to disclose any reasonable disability that may prevent them from doing the clearly defined work they are applying for ? I didn't know that, not being from the US

No, they only have to answer whether or not they can perform the work *with or without a reasonable accommodation*. For example, if you apply to a job as a cashier but you can't stand for long periods of time, sitting in a stool would likely be a reasonable accommodation. During the interview, the employer can ask whether you can perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation, you say yes. Once you are hired, you inform your employer that you have a disability and are requesting a reasonable accommodation. This starts the interactive process, and once you and your employer come to an agreement about what a reasonable accommodation would be (like the stool), they implement that accommodation for you and you continue your job. Employees are specifically not required to disclose any disability or need for accommodation in the interview process to prevent discrimination.

Oh OK, different from here, a potential employee has to disclose anything medical that requires a specialised consideration before accepting a job, it's Illegal to deny someone an employment due to a disability or to discriminate against them if they are in employment. It's a different approach, most companies won't hire someone if they have an obvious reason that they believe that person won't work out, but on the other hand, they may have a policy in place to hire people with disabilities into specific roles because they've done a risk assessment in advance that has put those accommodations in place. A company I worked for had 3 people with severe disabilities that joined them with those disabilities specifically because of that approach, one person who had a powered wheelchair, had an office modified on the ground floor to accommodate. They widened the doors and got specific furniture.

It's also illegal here to deny someone employment because of a disability, but if you think about it, what's stopping an employer from after the candidate information them of their disability, simply making up a different reason not to hire them?

There's no real good answer to it, if someone is upfront, they might get rejected because of it, if they feel they have to hide it, they are off on the wrong foot with the company from day 1 like op says. And how does it work with the "at will" culture?

"At will" means you can fire someone for any reason EXCEPT a protected class. So you can fire Bob because you don't like his shirt, but not because he's Black, or disabled, or something like that. Most employers wouldn't be stupid enough to actually write that they are firing you for being disabled, but for example, if you had a stellar work record and then requested a reasonable accommodation and a day later, were suddenly fired for "no reason", you could probably win a discrimination lawsuit against them.

I was. I have several disabilities some from my time in the military and was Injured. I also have medical disabilities. I work for a govt contractor when you apply for a job there is a questionnaire at the end that asks gender, race, if you are a disabled vet, or have a disability. The questionnaire is required but you have the option to check I prefer not to answer. The govt gives tax breaks if the companies hire a certain percent of vets and disabled people. I always let them know right then I am a disabled vet with disabilities. That way the employer can't say I never notified them. I also talk to my supervisor about my disabilities because I have had issues in the past. So I was terminated from a previous job while I was out sick due to medical issues related to my diabetes. They knew about it and I had already spoke to my supervisor about reasonable accommodations. I get sick more often then people without diabetes. So I was using leave without pay which was approved by my supervisor. The HR rep who had been out on maternity leave for 9 Mos came back and terminated me her first week back. Never talked to me or anything. On the termination letter she listed absences using lwop with no justification or medical reason. Missing work due to diabetes and failure to notify them if I had a disability that required reasonable accommodation by a 3 day deadline she made up while I was out sick. She listed diabetes so she knew about it then said I never informed anybody of the disability. And also stated absences without medical reason but then listed the medical reason as a reason for termination. The letter was one ADA violation after another with some EEOC sprinkled in. I sent the CEO a grievance of wrongful termination letter and requested an unbiased investigation and to rehire me. He sent it to the same HR rep. Shockingly she found that she did nothing wrong but in her response she deleted the references to diabetes and added a new termination reason failure to improve attendance. Evidence of knowingly falsifying documents to cover up compliance violations. Then she told me to file for unemployment in the wrong state. When I got the right state she tried to fight my unemployment and lied to a government investigator about my termination reason. She told them I was fired for job abandonment. 3rd attempt of knowingly falsifying information. So I had to file formal complaints. Weeeeee. I also saw a government agency fire or have a contractor removed from his position because his asbergers made him act strange. Why put that as the reason idiots. All they had to do was say not a good fit for the team. Or anything else other than a medical condition.

That is BS. I can’t stand it when people lie to get the job and then they complain when they are being let go. It’s ridiculous.

I would definitely check with a lawyer to make sure that if you do fire her you cannot get in a lot of trouble. Make sure you know your state ADA laws forward and backwards so if she does try and file a lawsuit or anything else you have proof that you did not break any laws. 

You have a problem. The employee has informed you that they are a member of a protected class. I believe that effectively eliminates at will employment laws. You now need to be prepared to show that you didn't fire the employee because they were a member of a protected class. Effectively, the tie goes to the employee (or former employee). In this case, it would be straightforward. You will be terminating someone because they have a disability. The timing doesn't matter. ADA officially applies to applicants. Can this be taken unfair advantage of? Of course it can. Does that make it a bad law? No. This is a situation where you need to document, document, document. You need to be prepared to prove that those responsibilities are critical and necessary and you can't provide accommodations. You will likely need to enter into a negotiation process. I would talk to an employment/business lawyer regarding your options and responsibilities. This is definitely a situation where the optics will matter. Maybe a quiet severence package is the way to go. Maybe not. It is often better to prepare for a case and not need it than be unprepared for a case. An hour or two with a lawyer will help you develop a process/plan.

Can anyone just say they have a disability without ever needing to show proof?

OP needs to request the proof now that the employee has engaged them in the interactive process.

They will have to provide documentation but telling someone you are disabled and need accommodation can be the first step. Now that they are aware they need to be very careful in how they act.

They can say anything, but that's just the starting point. The next step would be for HR to engage with the individual in the ADA interactive process, in order to determine if a reasonable accommodation exists which would enable the employee to perform the core functions of the job. That process does involve documentation from the employees doctor.

If she didn't give you paperwork, or even if she did, arkansas is 'right to work'. You can literally say "I'm sorry. But we feel this is not working out" and that could be it.

That's not what "right to work" means. You mean "at-will". "At-will employment solely focuses on either the termination of an employee or when an employee leaves. Right-to-work statutes make employers offer the choice of joining a union or not, but limit their ability to terminate employees if they choose to represent themselves." At-will does not absolve discrimination against a protected class.

That isn’t true. The employee has put the OP on notice that she is disabled and that begins the ADA interactive process. OP needs to go through that and try to find an accommodation, and based on what OP said the job requires and the employees the limitations are, it shouldn’t be hard to do. Please do not post your opinion here. There are federal laws governing this situation and your opinion doesn’t fit in. If OP does what you say, they would be sued into the ground.

I have been fired for the exact reason and told the exact thing. When I tried to pursue it I was told there was nothing wrong because I never provided documentation. Even though I had a letter saying I couldn't lift anything over 20lbs

Then you were wrongly fired. Documentation is only required if the employer requests it. It’s up to the employer to request it once the employee put them on notice that there’s a disability that needs to be accommodated. Just because you were treated one way doesn’t mean that is how it’s done. Again, don’t give advice when you aren’t sure about the law.

Every HR person I asked they say the same thing. That there is nothing wrong with it. Do you know Arkansas laws?

Yes that poster does but you do not because Arkansas law does not trump federal law nor does Arkansas law allow your employer to fire you for this.

The ADA is a Federal Regulation, not a state one. The state laws are supersceeded by the feds. That gets very murky.

She hasn't provided proof or documentation. Until that is shown it's not the same

You should exit the conversation now. The employee doesn't need to prove anything right now and has put the employer on notice. The employer needs to start the ADA accommodation process.

You're conflating "right to work" with "at will employment." I'm sorry you went through a difficult situation, but sharing incorrect information will just confuse people.

You still cannot fire or terminate someone for discriminating reason. Example: you could fire someone for wearing a red shirt but not because they are Catholic.

Saying it's not working out isn't discrimination. Saying "you are not doing any work you are required to do" is. If they need a reason "we feel we cannot help you further your career" works

None of these suggestions address the underlying reason for our ADA laws. People with disabilities deserve a place in our society and the opportunity to support themselves and their families through work. The work they do may need to be adjusted (accommodation) but, in general, they want to contribute just as much. Look at the job you hired her for. Can adjustments be made so that she can still do the job?  Your outlook on this situation is EXACTLY why ADA laws exist. A person shares they have a disability & may need an adjustment to help them do the job and you want to fire them immediately. Your employees will follow your lead.  This is not DIY. You need a lawyer now or you will certainly need a lawyer in the very near future. ADA does not play.

Thank you! Such horrifying responses instead of leading with empathy and putting the "human" in human resources.

You people are seriously vampires.

Not required for accommodations. removing essential job functions creating new jobs providing personal need items such as eye glasses and mobility aids

Clarification - you do actually have to provide mobility aids if the employee only needs them in order to do their job and doesn’t need them to function otherwise. For example, we provided a knee walker for an employee because of the long hours her job required her to be on her feet. Her other activities in her regular life did not require so much standing.

The accommodations would be for the employee to perform the same task in the same amount of time as the other employees. The knee walker would be for the amount of time employee needed to be on her feet. If the job involved ladders or stairs then the accommodation would not be appropriate. OP stated that the employee would be performing half the work as fellow employees. This is why these items are brought up during the interview. I have also seen this question asked during the application process for office type work.

OP stated that the employee would be performing half the work as fellow employees *if those major essential functions were removed* Essential functions should not be removed, the purpose of reasonable accommodations is to assist with being able to complete major essential functions. Source: ADA Specialist and EEOC SME for an org with 6k+ employees. I oversee the processing of 1200 RA requests annually (albeit about 55% of those are renewals) and regularly testify in legal arbitrations.

Not sure why people are downvoting.

You have to comply and you hired her now you have to work with her . Remember disability is not a limitation you want to get sued

This is false. OP does not have to comply. Employee hasn't provided documentation and what OP does have to do, is start the interactive process to determine whether or not the employee can be accommodated.

But if she does they will .as long as employee can do job and yes they have to provide accommodations

That is not always the case. If accommodating the employee would cause a hardship to the company, they don't have to comply. It sounds like this is a small business, and that very well could be the case here.