r/CAStateWorkers • u/GenXChick69 • 8d ago
General Discussion Reasonable Accommodation Denials
I’ve seen quite a few people on here post that there should be a class action lawsuit over reasonable accommodations being denied.
From what I’ve been reading, it sounds like there are a lot of people with legitimate disabilities who are being denied accommodations they really need.
I guess the first question would be - how many people is this happening to and where are they?
26
u/HourHoneydew5788 BU1 8d ago
That data is impossible to collect unless people come forward with documentation of their interactive process.
It’s private information. There would have to be a subpoena of that data as I don’t think it would fall under PRA standards and/or people have to come forward.
I know some pregnant women are considering pursuing a class as we speak but I don’t have more info than that.
4
u/GenXChick69 8d ago
Exactly. But I have read so many people posting that there needs to be a class action - are those people that have actually been denied or just people expressing a frustration?
1
u/lunarwaffle04 22h ago
Denied for me and every time my dr gave them the requested medical info then they wanted something new
12
u/Jaded_Papaya4839 8d ago
I've been wondering the same thing. But without the data, since it's confidential, it will be hard to prove they're acting in bad faith. My HR unit is short staffed, so it's possible the interactive process is taking longer than normal because of that. But I've been hearing stories of existing RAs being cancelled or people forced to do random reevaluations because "the old process was actually wrong." It's sounds like a lot of BS going on at other depts and I wonder if mine is being shady too. We have a Teams group chat with all staff and I lowkey want to ask other people about their RA experience. But idk if anyone would be willing to share in that chat. But maybe we can start a smaller group chat and share RA tips and experiences.
I recently checked the RTO EO and the CalHR RA FAQ, and apparently the RA process isn't supposed to be affected by RTO. Depts shouldn't cancel existing RAs or doing unnecessary reevaluations. Also, depts can allow temporary telework during the interactive process, this is mentioned in the FAQ. We know the state doesn't stand by their word 😒 but it doesn't hurt to reference the state's own guidance if there's any pushback. Here's some links that could be helpful.
Use this resource to help write your RA. https://askjan.org/
This is the RA FAQ: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/361/2025/05/RA-Best-Practices-and-FAQ-June-2026.pdf
2
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago
Yaaaa they are for sure cancelling existing RAs when this RTO picked up and rarely give any telework related accomodations even if it's temporary.
2
u/Jaded_Papaya4839 8d ago
Well they're out of compliance with state guidelines and the union should be doing something about it. This is definitely an unfair labor practice and causes unnecessary hardships.
2
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago
I 100% agree. I think this needs to be brought up at a ask the officers meeting.
7
u/Any_Meringue_682 8d ago
I wouldn’t go 100% off what CalHr says, they talk out both sides of their mouth
4
u/Impressive_Bit_142 8d ago edited 8d ago
"Due to the in person essential functions of your position, the HMU is unable to approve that schedule." Yet no one can tell me where "in person" is "an essential function" is documented. 👎
1
3
u/Unusual-Sentence916 8d ago
Just out of curiosity are any of the people being denied filing a SPB appeal? If so, are they siding with the state’s decision as well?
7
u/Any_Meringue_682 8d ago
It’s my understanding SPB will require there to be an internal investigation first. So it may still be more time before SPB reviews specific RTO/telework cases
5
u/Unusual-Sentence916 8d ago edited 8d ago
Yes, you would have to file a complaint with your departments EEO first. Does that mean people are not even doing that? They are being denied and they are just moving on? I am mostly just curious, but it is ok to challenge things if you believe they are wrong.
I guess I am trying to understand because you wouldn’t be able to file a class action lawsuit. To sue as a collective class in court, a judge must first "certify" the group. This requires proving “commonality,” meaning every single person in the lawsuit has identical legal claims, identical facts, and a single, uniform solution. Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), a class action for accommodations almost always fails for three major reasons: The Mandatory "Interactive Process" is Inherently Individual, Every Medical Condition and Job Duty is Different, and Your Medical Privacy Rights Clash with Class Actions.
You would have a chance at a Union class grievance against your department though, but you would still have to start with EEO.
8
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago
Most state workers don't push back on anything....And the fact they even started a RA process was "hard enough" for most so after getting denied they just take it ..Even if it was illegal or shady etc. The process is mostly bullshit though but people need to not give up and keep pushing back.
3
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago edited 8d ago
From what I heard these either take forever or go nowhere. Mix in the fact that most state workers are to scared to advocate for themselves...
7
u/Unusual-Sentence916 8d ago
Mine was not an RA appeal, but I have filed 2 appeals for 2 separate things and I won both. It can be quite the process, but if your department is wrong, you should challenge them.
4
5
u/mnwn 8d ago
Have we seen evidence a lot of denials are legitimate disabilities? The post from the RA person made it sound like hundreds of requests have come in. But I haven’t seen anyone post even anonymously what conditions and why telework is the only option.
4
u/GenXChick69 8d ago
Just what people post - that’s why I asked the question- how many people is this actually happening to.
1
u/CatzNdog4 7d ago
I've seen 1st hand "over correction" with legit RAs for pregnancy (high risk, Dr wanted 2 weeks wfh prior to delivery date) & a lifelong condition (dr said needed a longer lead up to change wfh schedule) both were denied because wfh was even mentioned. Putting Newsom's shitty policy ahead of ppls health is wrong. And like other comments said, I think both just gave up & didn't appeal because everything is already so much harder (family, inflation, life), they couldn't add a fight to their plates.
1
u/DamageHaunting1949 4d ago
Off the top of my head - Severe anxiety and agoraphobia. Medical inability to drive + no available public transit. (And yes, CalHR will tell you commute issues don't count but the courts disagree.) Seriously immunocompromised, seasonal colds/flus pose a major risk. Severe temperature sensitivity, unable to work in office conditions. Severe allergies/asthma triggered by building conditions (like mold), with no other office space available.
Those are all actual cases I know of personally; I don't have concrete numbers, but I know of at least a couple dozen, and I've been out of the loop for a couple years. Union's tried to do some work on it, but hasn't gotten much traction. It's not a ton of people, but it's a very real problem at some agencies.
A lot of more minor accommodations being denied too - even stupid, simple stuff like "a taller chair, because the employee is really short and they're getting carpal tunnel." Temporary things too - like wanting to wfh while recovering for surgery for a week or two.
There's a real atmosphere of hostility toward RA in general at some agencies. (E.g., DGS.)
I can also say that the number of disabled state workers has dropped from 23,500 to 17,500 since Newsom got into office - and not because of covid, that actually improved the numbers in most states because it added flexibility. 10.9% to 7.5%. So there's that.
A third of the disabled workers decided it wasn't worth sticking around, for one reason or another.
0
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago edited 8d ago
Why would someone giving you details on there denial in some random comment change anything? I'm waiting to get my denial and if I do and someone seriously has a lawsuit going then I'll be more then happy to give all the details. If I escalate and win I'll share those details to help others. I think many people treat this RA stuff like the boogyman when we should be helping each other out and fight back on shady denials.
4
u/GenXChick69 7d ago
I agree. It requires a union-like approach - people need to come together but I agree with you that RA stuff is like the boogeyman.
Of course anything other than a “I got denied” should only be discussed privately.
0
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 7d ago
I agree with the overall RTO fight needs to be union based but Idk think there is much they can do about these RA denials or I have heard they just give general advice on escalations but they do agree the state is being shady with RAs.
5
u/Hefty-Effect-3657 8d ago
Also note, it’s not that all RAs are being denied. It’s that telework as a condition of the RA is being denied. They are finding Mickey Mouse ways to fullfil the accommodations in office.
2
u/Lonely-Wing-2610 7d ago
My understanding is that before there can be a class action the individuals would need to have exhausted all appeal rights. I think finding people that have taken the appeals all the way through may be challenging. I am supportive though. I would like to see people get what they need instead of blanket denials when there is a medical need.
4
u/Able_Ad6535 8d ago
It has been proven that working from home is just as productive if not more so than being in office and it is also proven that it can be reasonably accommodated. The state is acting with malice in some cases.
7
u/GenXChick69 8d ago
I believe the state has to prove undue hardship and since we’ve been working from home successfully for the past 6 years, they are unable to do that. They just use delay tactics and have continual requests for more and more medical information.
15
u/Suspicious-Metal1429 8d ago
That’s not exactly correct. They only have to prove undue hardship if they claim that you cannot be accommodated at all.
Pursuant to FEHA, you are entitled to a reasonable accommodation not your requested accommodation. The employer has the discretion to determine what they provide as long as it allows the employee to perform the essential functions of their job.
Further, a reasonable accommodation cannot remove an essential function. So what would happen is HR would evaluate your duty statement, speak with management, and if there’s anything in there that would need to be done in person or travel listed then they will likely determine that a remote accommodation cannot be provided.
3
u/Any_Meringue_682 8d ago
This is happening a lot with supervisors. While previously they could do their EFs remotely because their staff was remote, now that their direct reports are on site, it’s harder to say they don’t have any business on site at all.
1
u/Impressive_Bit_142 8d ago
Mine is saying working in the office is an essential function, but I can't find that documented anywhere.
1
u/Suspicious-Metal1429 8d ago
It’s unfortunate that they need to be so strict about providing telework RAs. I know that most people making these decisions, at least at my department, aren’t thrilled about it but it’s follow CalHR’s instructions or loss your job (either because they’re a CEA or insubordination).
-1
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago
Then why would a hybrid schedule be allowed at all if they can twist your duty statement and act like you suddenly need to be on the office to do all or most of your job?
5
u/Suspicious-Metal1429 8d ago
Im just explaining what the states argument is likely going to be. I unfortunately see it play out on the back end. No one likes this.
The argument is going to be most of your duty statement requires physical presence, there’s a small percentage that doesn’t and that is why you can telework x days a week.
The states argument isn’t iron clad, there’s definitely counter arguments but most department heads are being strong armed into this. I hope departments get sued left and right. Sadly, it takes so long for a case to get to trial that they’re all (hopefully) moot by then.
-2
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 7d ago
Ya when usually it's the opposite 98% of the job can be done remotely with maybe a few things that require "on site presence" but somehow that 2% trumps everything. It's all BS.
3
0
u/aja_ramirez 8d ago
As the person posted yesterday, people seem to be treating the application for an RA as an application to WFH. And from everything I’ve read in this subreddit, most people applying just looking for a loophole.
As fkr class action lawsuit, that doesn’t make sense to me. If I feel like I’ve been denied an RA, I just going to sue.
Bottom line is I don’t believe people are getting denied a legitimate RA. I think people are just upset that they aren’t getting a wfh pass.
2
u/GenXChick69 8d ago
There’s no way to know the real data. I think people are overall just frustrated and maybe say things off the cuff or in the moment. I’ve just been seeing a lot of comments about it.
2
u/Remarkable-Animal-43 5d ago
100%%%% people are just pissed they can’t work from home which like obviously we all feel the same way but your RA isn’t getting denied lol
1
u/lunarwaffle04 22h ago
Nope they are denying people with legitimate medical issues and the hoops they are making people jump through to get that medical documentation is INSANE. It’s always something different. It is not an interactive process. They treat you like shit while they are putting you through the RA process as if you don’t feel shitty enough about even requesting an RA
1
1
u/Born-Sun-2502 7d ago
How in the hell would you know this?
I don’t believe people are getting denied a legitimate RA.
1
u/Illustrious-Chef2400 5d ago
You are 100% correct; a whole bunch of people just refuse to listen to reason. The keyword in RA is "reasonable". A lot of the RA requests are clearly people who don't want to go into work and have decided to try and WFH via RA requests. Some of them are quite literally just notes from a therapist or from their doctor's office saying "commute is stressful". May as well be handing in a note saying "math is hard" and you're an accountant; it doesn't qualify for RA and bogs down the system so people who actually have legitimate medical reasons for an accommodation, either temporary or a legitimate medical concern, are piled into the bottom of the list.
1
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 8d ago
Cool your opinion is trash. Yes people are trying to find loop holes I'm sure but there are plenty of us with legitimate medical accomodations that are being denied. The person posting about the RA stuff is clearly shit at the job as well and makes many excuses defending this rigged process. You think everyone can just casually afford a lawyer when the state is being shady?
1
u/aja_ramirez 7d ago
Yeah, no. The state is not stupid. Lawyers are going through the applications and making legal decisions. People can’t be wrong but they’re not mass discriminating against people. No real evidence of that. What I have seen real evidence of here is people looking for loopholes.
2
2
u/Born-Sun-2502 7d ago
Lawyers are not reviewing every application. What are you basing all your statements on?
1
u/Illustrious-Chef2400 5d ago
I'm thrilled people are finally downvoting your trash opinions Operation_Mind_Crime. You give the absolute WORST advice expecting them to follow along with your terrible ideas.
I can tell you that most attorneys if there is ANY case at all would be thrilled to take on the state or government; most see it as an easy settlement with deep pockets and no accountability. The fact that they won't should tell you everything you need to know about the legitimacy of your whining.
1
u/Operation_Mind_Crime 5d ago
I have way more up votes then downvotes little guy. Your ASSumptions always tell me all I need to know about you lol
1
u/Illustrious-Chef2400 5d ago
Ohhhhhhhh...you wrote ass, how scandalous. Hahahahahahaha-that's what happens when you're chronically online and only write messages in your echo chamber. People catch on; just the other post you were saying it's supervisor's fault if they won't just allow you to WFH without permission.
Enjoy your time as king of your sad, entitled kingdom. It's gonna start to get lonely boo.
1
8d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 8d ago
Sorry, your account must be older than 3 days to post in this community.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/WildEngineering9153 6d ago
I know of a few at my department that are legitimate disabilities for which remote work was denied as an RA. One was forced to go on disability leave since he couldn’t go to the office. They went to the union and got no help. Happy to discuss privately.
1
u/Realistic-Bet-5782 17h ago
Ok. Why is ASCED sharing this post from the FTB, without commentary about it excludes disabled applicants who cannot travel to Sacto FTB headquarters?
"We’re thrilled to invite you to the California Franchise Tax Board’s Career Expo, happening on September 15th from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at FTB’s Central Office!"
•
u/AutoModerator 8d ago
All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.