Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 52293-4-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 52293-4-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2052293-4-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

1,789 chars

accommodation claim because she presented evidence that Home Depot’s accommodation of her

physical disability was insufficient. Home Depot argues that summary judgment was proper on

this issue because Mackey failed to notify Home Depot that the accommodation it provided to

her was insufficient or unreasonable. We agree with Home Depot.

The WLAD gives employers an affirmative duty to accommodate an employee’s

disability. RCW 49.60.180(2); LaRose v. King County, 8 Wn. App. 2d 90, 125, 437 P.3d 701

(2019). An employee claiming his or her employer failed to accommodate a disability must

prove that (1) the employee suffered from a disability, (2) the employee was qualified to do the

job at issue, (3) the employee gave his or her employer notice of the disability, and (4) the

employer failed to reasonably accommodate that disability. LaRose, 8 Wn. App. 2d at 125-26.

24
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 52293-4-II

“A reasonable accommodation must allow the employee to work in the environment and

perform the essential functions of her job without substantially limiting symptoms.” Frisino v.

Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, 160 Wn. App. 765, 777-78, 249 P.3d 1044 (2011). Where multiple

potential methods of accommodation exist, the employer is entitled to select the appropriate

method. Id. at 779.

Home Depot accommodated Mackey’s degenerative disc disease by allowing Mackey to

have other employees do any required lifting. Mackey argues that this accommodation was

unreasonable because it required her to seek out the help of other employees and tell them about

her disability before completing the lifting tasks assigned to her.

However, an employer “must be able to ascertain whether its efforts at accommodation