Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 383814_pub.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,721 chars

this reason, the accommodation is an undue burden. Trans World Airlines, 432 U.S. at

79.

2. Reasonable accommodation does not require “hand-holding”

The majority also concludes that summary judgment is precluded because a

reasonable jury might find that the School, without undue burden, could have assisted

Ms. Suarez in finding an appropriate position. This conclusion is inconsistent with

federal authorities.

3
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 38381-4-III
Suarez v. State—dissenting

Ms. Suarez asserts she did not know she had to apply for a different position to get

a different position. The School could not have known of her supposed confusion.2

After she commenced litigation, she asserted for the first time that the School should

have assisted her in finding a position that suited her religious practices.

Notably, Ms. Suarez does not claim to have any unique difficulty in learning of an

appropriate position or of completing an application. She could read e-mails and

complete paperwork just like any other employee. Regardless, federal authorities do not

require the type of “hand-holding” that Ms. Suarez first requested after she commenced

litigation.

The majority discusses Porter v. City of Chicago, 700 F.3d 944, 953 (7th Cir.

2012), which holds that an employer’s reasonable accommodation of offering a job

change with a different shift did not require “the hand-holding” of being invited to or

even informed of how to apply. The majority nonetheless distinguishes Porter, finding

that the School did not reasonably accommodate Ms. Suarez because there is no evidence

it told her to apply for a different job. Majority at 22-25.