This recent First Circuit decision offers a crash course on the perils of ignoring an employee's requests for accommodations—and the consequences of getting it wrong.
Jesse Sutherland worked for Peterson's as a service technician. After tearing his meniscus and enduring significant knee pain, he repeatedly asked for a reduced schedule to accommodate his injury, supported by medical documentation. Instead of engaging in an interactive process or adjusting his workload, Peterson's continued to assign him grueling and labor intensive tasks. After taking medical leave for surgery, Sutherland informed Peterson's that he was ready to return to work. Their response? Crickets. Later, he learned he'd been terminated the same day he was cleared to return, allegedly due to a "lack of work" resulting from the pandemic.
Sutherland sued for disability discrimination, retaliation, and failure to accommodate under the ADA. The trial court granted summary judgment for the employer, but the First Circuit reversed:
✅ The ADA covers even temporary disabilities, like Sutherland's knee injury.
✅ Employers can't dodge accommodation requests without engaging in a meaningful interactive process.
✅ Retaliating against employees for seeking accommodations is a recipe for legal trouble.
Employers, if an employee raises a disability concern, don't dismiss it. Engage in the interactive process, evaluate the request in good faith, and document your efforts. The cost of getting it wrong could be steep. Just ask Peterson's Oil Service.