This month’s featured article highlights how a clearly written Reasonable Accommodation policy, supported by a legally vetted employee handbook, helped a California employer navigate a remote or hybrid work accommodation request without exposing the company to legal risk. This case underscores the importance of maintaining a custom employee handbook with clearly defined employee handbook policies that guide managers through complex accommodation decisions. Need a customized, legally compliant employee handbook? Visit our Handbook page to build yours in just a few clicks.
When a Remote Work Request Becomes an Accommodation Issue
For employers, accommodation requests involving remote or hybrid work can feel especially complex. When handled improperly, they often lead to claims of automatic denial or failure to engage in the interactive process. In this case, the employer followed its employee handbook policies step by step—and avoided exactly those pitfalls.
An employee returned to active work after a period away and requested a temporary remote work arrangement as an accommodation. The employee’s role was historically performed on-site, and leadership initially questioned whether remote work was feasible given the position’s operational responsibilities.
Rather than denying the request outright, or approving it indefinitely without guardrails, the company paused and engaged Akamai HR Solutions to ensure the request was handled through the formal reasonable accommodation process. This distinction mattered. A request for remote or hybrid work is not automatically a reasonable accommodation, but it can be, depending on the role, essential functions, and the employer’s ability to engage in an individualized assessment.
The Handbook Policy: Clear, Structured, and Legally Defensible
Fortunately, the employer’s employee handbook, developed with Akamai HR Solutions, contained a detailed Reasonable Accommodation Policy that clearly outlined:
- What qualifies as a reasonable accommodation
- How employees may request accommodation
- The employer’s obligation to engage in the interactive process
- The Company’s right to approve, modify, or deny a request based on undue hardship
As the handbook explains:
Reasonable accommodation is a modification or adjustment to a job, the work environment, or the way things usually are done that provides a qualified employee with a disability an opportunity to perform the essential functions of the position, with or without reasonable accommodation.
It also clearly states that the Company will:
Act promptly to engage in an informal process to clarify the employee’s needs and identify the appropriate reasonable accommodation,” and may request documentation where the need is not obvious.
This policy framework ensured the request was evaluated consistently, thoughtfully, and in compliance with both California FEHA and the federal ADA.
The Interactive Process in Action
The Company acknowledged the request, provided the employee with the Company’s accommodation request form, and initiated the interactive process. HR, leadership, and the employee discussed:
- The essential functions of the role
- Which duties could be performed remotely
- Which duties required on-site presence
- The anticipated duration of the requested accommodation
Rather than approving or denying the request in full, the Company offered a temporary hybrid arrangement, approved for a defined period, allowing the employee to work remotely part of the week while maintaining required on-site responsibilities. This approach aligned with the handbook’s guidance that the Company may “offer alternate suggestions for reasonable accommodation or choose among possible accommodations.”
Why the Employer’s Decision Held Up
The employer’s response was legally defensible because:
- The interactive process occurred. The Company engaged in dialogue rather than issuing an automatic denial.
- The accommodation was individualized. The decision was based on the employee’s role, not a blanket rule about remote work.
- The accommodation was documented. Start dates, expectations, and duration were clearly defined.
- The handbook controlled the outcome. The decision aligned squarely with written employee handbook policies, not ad hoc judgment.
In California, where accommodation obligations are among the most employee-protective in the country, these steps significantly reduced legal exposure.
What Could Have Gone Wrong Without the Policy
Without a clear, legally compliant employee handbook, the Company could have faced claims alleging:
- Failure to engage in the interactive process
- Automatic denial of a reasonable accommodation
- Inconsistent treatment of remote work requests
- Retaliation or interference with protected rights
Each of these risks is common—and preventable—when employers rely on informal decisions instead of handbook-driven processes.
Employer Takeaways
- Remote work requests should be evaluated through the accommodation process, not reflexively approved or denied
- Temporary or modified accommodations can be reasonable and legally sound
- The interactive process must be documented
- Clear employee handbook policies protect both the employee and the business
- A legally vetted employee handbook is your first line of defense
- A well-drafted HR compliance handbook provides consistency across managers and locations
If your organization is navigating accommodation requests, or revisiting its approach to remote or hybrid work, now is the time to ensure your policies are current, compliant, and clearly written.
Disclaimer: The information in this featured article is provided for general educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Akamai HR Solutions, LLC is not a law firm, and no attorney–client relationship is created by your use of this content. Laws may change or apply differently to your business. For legal guidance tailored to your specific circumstances, please consult a qualified attorney.