gt.jpg)
An employer who rejected a return-to-work release from an employee’s treating physician in favor of its own doctor’s conflicting opinion may have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This summary explains the case background and practical lessons for employers and employees.
Facts of the case
In Williams v. Baltimore City Community College, an employee with a degenerative eye condition took leave for surgical treatment under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). When her FMLA leave ended, the employer required a doctor’s note to support additional leave and required a Workability Examination by the State Medical Director.
The employee’s treating physician cleared her to return to work on a specific date. The State doctor, however, concluded the employee’s symptoms were unlikely to improve enough in the foreseeable future to allow a return on that date. The employer relied on the State doctor’s opinion and terminated the employee, who then sued for ADA discrimination and failure to accommodate.
The Court’s decision
The court rejected the employer’s argument that the employee was not disabled under the ADA. The ADA defines disability to include: (1) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits major life activities; (2) a record of such impairment; or (3) being regarded as having such an impairment. The court found a reasonable jury could conclude the employer regarded the employee as disabled when it discounted the treating physician’s opinion.
The court dismissed the employee’s separate failure-to-accommodate claim because the ADA generally does not require accommodations for employees who are only "regarded as" disabled and do not have a substantially limiting impairment.
Lessons learned
The ADA does not specify whether the medical information used by an employer must come from the employee’s provider or from a doctor selected by the employer. The EEOC prefers using the employee’s treating physician but allows employers to obtain their own medical evaluation if the treating physician does not provide sufficient information.
When an employer obtains conflicting medical opinions, it should not simply reject the treating physician’s opinion without explaining why and giving the treating physician an opportunity to address perceived deficiencies. Employers that need practical guidance on evaluating workplace restrictions and accommodations can review Workplace Injury and Accommodation Scenarios for examples and context.
Employees and employers concerned about long-term work limitations may also find information on disability options helpful; see Enhanced Disability Insurance for related resources.
Don Phin, Esq., is VP of Strategic Business Solutions at ThinkHR and has decades of experience in HR and employment practices. For additional assistance with workplace disability or accommodation questions, consider reaching out to an expert or talk to an agent.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an employer rely on its own doctor instead of my treating physician?
Yes, employers may obtain their own medical evaluation, but they should not ignore a treating physician’s opinion without a clear, documented reason and an opportunity for clarification.
What should I do if the employer’s doctor contradicts my doctor?
Ask the employer for the specific concerns about your treating physician’s report and provide your doctor a chance to address those concerns or submit additional documentation.
Does being "regarded as" disabled guarantee an accommodation?
No. The ADA’s accommodation obligation generally applies when an employee has a disability that substantially limits major life activities, not merely when they are regarded as disabled.
How can employers reduce legal risk when medical opinions conflict?
Document all communications, explain why a particular medical opinion is insufficient, and give the treating physician an opportunity to respond before making adverse employment decisions.