The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees with disabilities. However, this obligation is not absolute. Employers may deny an accommodation request if it would impose an “undue hardship” on their operations. Understanding when this defense is legitimate—and when it’s not—is crucial for both employees seeking accommodations and employers evaluating requests.
At Nisar Law Group, we regularly advise clients on accommodation disputes involving undue hardship claims. This guide explains the legal standards for undue hardship, factors courts consider, common misconceptions, and strategies for addressing these situations effectively.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for legal advice. It is essential to consult with an experienced employment lawyer at our law firm to discuss the specific facts of your case and understand your legal rights and options. This information does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Understanding "Undue Hardship" Under the Law
The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 significantly expanded the definition of disability, making it easier to establish the first element. However, proving that the adverse action occurred because of your disability often remains the most challenging aspect of disability discrimination cases.
For federal employees and those working for employers receiving federal funding, the Rehabilitation Act provides protections similar to the ADA. Section 501 applies to federal employees, while Section 504 covers organizations receiving federal financial assistance.
Many states and municipalities have enacted disability discrimination laws that may provide broader protections than federal law. These laws might cover smaller employers exempt from the ADA, define disability more inclusively, offer additional remedies, or establish different procedural requirements.
Understanding which laws apply to your situation is crucial for determining what evidence to gather and how to structure your case.
Key Factors Courts Consider
When evaluating undue hardship claims, courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) consider several specific factors outlined in the ADA:
1. Nature and Cost of the Accommodation
Courts analyze both direct and indirect costs associated with the requested accommodation, including actual expense of purchasing equipment or services, installation costs, ongoing maintenance expenses, training requirements, and administrative costs of implementation.
While cost alone rarely constitutes undue hardship for medium or large businesses, it may be more compelling for small employers with limited resources. However, even for small businesses, courts examine costs in relation to overall financial resources, not in isolation.
2. Overall Financial Resources of the Facility
Courts consider the specific facility’s financial capacity, examining the facility’s overall budget and profitability, number of employees at the location, existing expenditures on accommodations, and impact of the accommodation cost on the facility’s budget.
This factor recognizes that a single location within a larger company may have limited financial resources compared to the organization as a whole.
3. Overall Size and Resources of the Employer
Beyond the individual facility, courts examine the entire organization’s capacity, including the company’s overall size, total number of employees, annual revenue and profitability, available capital, and tax incentives available for accommodations.
Where the facility making the accommodation is part of a larger entity, the structure and overall resources of the larger organization would be considered. In general, a larger employer with greater resources would be expected to make accommodations requiring greater effort or expense than would be required of a smaller employer with fewer resources.
4. Type of Operation
Courts consider how the accommodation might affect the nature and structure of the business, including the organization’s primary activities and functions, composition of the workforce, physical requirements unique to the industry, regulatory requirements, and customer needs.
This factor recognizes that different types of businesses face different operational constraints that may affect accommodation feasibility.
5. Impact on the Operation of the Facility
Courts examine how the accommodation would affect daily operations, including effects on productivity, impact on other employees’ ability to perform their duties, disruption to workflows, changes to supervision requirements, and effects on customer service or product quality.
Minor inconveniences or temporary disruptions generally don’t constitute undue hardship. The impact must substantially interfere with essential operations.
Common Misconceptions About Undue Hardship
Several widespread misconceptions about undue hardship lead to improper denials of accommodation requests. Understanding these misunderstandings helps both employers and employees evaluate accommodation situations more accurately.
Misconception: Any Significant Cost Creates Undue Hardship
Cost alone rarely constitutes undue hardship for medium or large employers. Courts evaluate expenses relative to the employer’s overall financial resources, not in absolute terms. Even accommodations costing thousands of dollars may not create undue hardship for financially stable companies.
The EEOC and courts have consistently ruled that employers cannot claim undue hardship based solely on cost unless the expense is truly significant in relation to their resources. While a $5,000 accommodation might create undue hardship for a small business with limited revenue, the same expense would likely be reasonable for a national corporation.
Additionally, employers must consider available tax benefits that offset accommodation costs. The Disabled Access Credit, Barrier Removal Tax Deduction, and Work Opportunity Tax Credit can substantially reduce the net expense of many accommodations, weakening cost-based hardship claims.
Misconception: Employee Preference Can Be Ignored If Any Accommodation Is Offered
Employers sometimes believe they satisfy their legal obligations by offering any accommodation, regardless of effectiveness. However, the ADA requires employers to provide accommodations that effectively enable employees to perform essential job functions and enjoy equal benefits of employment.
While employers don’t need to provide the exact accommodation requested if alternatives would be equally effective, they cannot dismiss employee input about effectiveness. The employee’s perspective on what accommodation works best for their specific disability deserves substantial consideration.
The accommodation process should involve a collaborative dialogue considering both the employee’s needs and the employer’s operational realities. Simply imposing an accommodation without considering employee feedback often fails to satisfy legal requirements.
Misconception: Accommodations That Alter Job Duties Always Create Undue Hardship
Employers sometimes claim that accommodations requiring any modification of job duties automatically create undue hardship. This overly broad interpretation misunderstands the distinction between essential and marginal job functions.
While employers aren’t required to eliminate essential job functions, they may need to restructure how or when those functions are performed. Additionally, reasonable accommodations can include redistributing marginal (non-essential) job duties when necessary.
Courts examine whether a particular duty is truly essential to the position based on factors including:
- Whether the position exists specifically to perform that function
- The number of other employees available to perform the function
- The degree of expertise required for the function
- The consequences of not requiring the employee to perform the function
- The current work experience of incumbents in similar jobs
Employers who claim undue hardship based on job restructuring must demonstrate that the specific duties at issue are genuinely essential and cannot be reasonably modified or redistributed.
Misconception: Negative Coworker Reactions Constitute Undue Hardship
Some employers claim that potential negative reactions from coworkers—such as resentment, decreased morale, or concerns about “fairness”—create undue hardship. Courts consistently reject this argument.
The purpose of the ADA is to provide equal opportunity to individuals with disabilities, which sometimes requires differential treatment through reasonable accommodations. Coworker concerns about perceived preferential treatment do not constitute legitimate undue hardship.
Employers facing coworker resistance should address misconceptions through education about the legal requirements for accommodations while maintaining the employee’s privacy regarding specific disability information. Negative attitudes among staff never justify denying legally required accommodations.
Misconception: Accommodations Setting “Bad Precedent” Create Undue Hardship
Employers sometimes worry that providing an accommodation will create a “flood” of similar requests from other employees, arguing this potential future burden constitutes undue hardship. Courts reject this speculative reasoning.
Undue hardship must be evaluated based on the specific accommodation currently requested, not hypothetical future scenarios. Additionally, accommodation assessments are inherently individualized—what’s reasonable for one employee’s circumstances may not be reasonable for another.
The fact that multiple employees might eventually need similar accommodations doesn’t automatically create undue hardship. Each request must be evaluated individually based on its specific impact at the time it’s made.
Legitimate Undue Hardship Scenarios
While the threshold is high, certain situations may legitimately constitute undue hardship. Understanding these scenarios helps distinguish between valid and improper denials.
Fundamentally Altering the Business
Accommodations that would fundamentally alter the nature or purpose of the business may create legitimate undue hardship. For example:
- A small music venue being asked to eliminate all amplified music to accommodate an employee with sensitivity to loud sounds
- A manufacturing facility that would need to eliminate essential safety procedures to accommodate an employee’s disability
- A restaurant being asked to create entirely separate cooking facilities for an employee with severe allergies
These scenarios involve changes that strike at the core purpose or identity of the business, distinguishing them from reasonable operational adjustments.
Direct Threat to Safety
Accommodations that would create a significant risk to the health or safety of the employee or others may constitute undue hardship. However, employers must base safety concerns on objective evidence and individualized assessment, not stereotypes about disabilities.
To establish a legitimate safety-based undue hardship, employers must demonstrate:
- A specific, identified risk (not speculative concerns)
- The likelihood of harm is high (not remote or unlikely)
- The potential harm is severe (not minor)
- No reasonable accommodation would reduce the risk to acceptable levels
Generalized concerns or references to slight increases in risk typically fail to satisfy this rigorous standard.
Severe Operational Disruption
Accommodations causing severe, ongoing disruption to essential business operations beyond temporary adjustment periods may constitute undue hardship. Examples might include:
- Accommodations requiring multiple other employees to substantially alter their essential job functions on an ongoing basis
- Schedule accommodations that would leave essential functions uncovered during critical operational periods
- Location accommodations that would place an employee outside the supervision required for their position
Courts distinguish between significant operational restructuring and minor inconveniences or temporary adjustments, which do not constitute undue hardship.
Excessive Cost for Small Employers
While cost alone rarely justifies undue hardship for larger employers, it may create legitimate hardship for small businesses with limited financial resources. For a cost-based hardship claim to succeed, the employer must typically demonstrate:
- The specific costs of the accommodation in detail
- The organization’s overall financial position
- Why the expense would significantly impact financial stability
- Why external funding sources (tax incentives, vocational rehabilitation) are unavailable or insufficient
- Why less expensive alternative accommodations would be ineffective
Small employers facing potentially costly accommodations should explore government assistance programs, tax incentives, and phased implementation before denying requests based on expense.
How Employers Should Document Undue Hardship Claims
Employers claiming undue hardship must thoroughly document their determination to withstand potential legal challenges. Proper documentation includes:
Detailed Financial Analysis
For cost-based hardship claims, employers should prepare an itemized breakdown of direct and indirect costs, comparison to department and organizational budgets, analysis of available tax incentives, documentation of efforts to find external funding, and evaluation of potential phased implementation.
This financial documentation should clearly demonstrate why the specific costs would create genuine hardship given the organization’s resources.
Operational Impact Assessment
For operations-based hardship claims, employers should document specific operational functions affected, quantifiable impact on productivity or quality, effects on other employees’ essential functions, customer impact assessment, and evaluation of potential workflow redesigns considered.
This assessment should move beyond generalized concerns to specific, measurable impacts on core business functions.
Alternative Accommodations Considered
Employers should document all alternative accommodations considered, why each alternative would be insufficient or create hardship, interactive process communications with the employee, expert consultations obtained, and resources consulted (Job Accommodation Network, disability organizations).
If a particular accommodation would cause undue hardship, the employer must try to identify another accommodation that will not pose such a hardship. This documentation demonstrates the employer’s good faith participation in the interactive process despite ultimate denial.
Individualized Assessment
Employers should document the individualized nature of their determination, including specific limitations identified for this particular employee, essential job functions analysis for the specific position, unique operational considerations for the department, previous accommodation experiences, and employee input regarding potential alternatives.
This individualized assessment helps prevent broad policies or assumptions from replacing case-by-case evaluation.
How Employees Can Challenge Undue Hardship Claims
When facing an accommodation denial based on claimed undue hardship, employees have several strategies to challenge the determination.
Request Specific Justification
First, ask for detailed written explanation of the undue hardship determination, including specific factors creating hardship, financial analysis (if cost-based), operational impact assessment, and alternatives considered and rejected.
This information helps you evaluate whether the claim meets the legal standard and provides important documentation if you pursue formal action.
Propose Alternative Accommodations
If the initial accommodation was denied, propose alternatives that might address the employer’s specific concerns while still meeting your needs. Consider less expensive options, phased implementation, temporary trial periods, modified schedules or locations, technology solutions, or job restructuring alternatives.
Creative alternatives sometimes overcome legitimate employer concerns while still providing effective accommodation.
Identify Comparable Situations
Look for situations where similar accommodations were provided to other employees, suggesting your request wouldn’t actually create undue hardship. Relevant comparisons include similar accommodations provided to others, similar expenses approved for non-accommodation purposes, operational adjustments made for business reasons, or flexibility offered to employees without disabilities.
These comparisons can demonstrate inconsistent application of hardship standards or reveal potential discrimination.
Provide Additional Information
Sometimes employers lack complete information about accommodation options, costs, or implementation strategies. Consider providing information about actual costs (which are often overestimated), resources for equipment or service providers, information about available tax incentives, examples of successful implementation elsewhere, or additional medical documentation clarifying needs.
This additional information might help employers reconsider initial hardship determinations.
Consider External Assistance
Various external resources can support accommodation implementation, including state vocational rehabilitation agencies (which may fund accommodations), Job Accommodation Network (for free technical assistance), disability advocacy organizations, tax incentive programs, and technology assistance programs.
These resources can sometimes eliminate financial or implementation concerns underlying hardship claims.
Pursue Formal Complaints When Necessary
If internal resolution proves unsuccessful, consider formal legal action by filing a discrimination charge with the EEOC or state equivalent, requesting external mediation, consulting with an experienced employment attorney, or pursuing litigation if administrative remedies fail.
Remember that undue hardship is an affirmative defense—the employer bears the burden of proving it with specific, concrete evidence.
Conclusion: Balancing Rights and Realities
The “undue hardship” defense creates a careful balance between the rights of employees with disabilities to receive reasonable accommodations and the legitimate operational needs of employers. This balance requires good-faith engagement from both sides—employers must genuinely consider accommodation requests without assuming hardship, while employees must recognize that certain accommodations may truly exceed what’s reasonable for a particular employer.
Understanding the legal standards, common misconceptions, and strategic approaches discussed in this guide helps both employers and employees navigate accommodation discussions more effectively. The key is approaching these situations with accurate legal knowledge, open communication, and a genuine commitment to finding workable solutions.
Undue hardship can protect employers from providing accommodations that are too burdensome, but is also an extremely high threshold to meet under the ADA. The Job Accommodation Network reports that most workplace accommodations cost nothing or under $500—far below what would constitute hardship for most employers. With creativity, cooperation, and proper resources, most accommodation needs can be met without undue burden on employers.
If you’re facing challenges with accommodation requests or denials based on undue hardship claims, consulting with an experienced employment attorney can help you understand your rights and options. At Nisar Law Group, we regularly assist both employees and employers in navigating these complex situations. Contact us for a confidential consultation to discuss your specific circumstances and develop an effective strategy for resolution.
Related Resources
- Workplace Disability Discrimination: Your Complete Legal Guide
- Reasonable Accommodations: What to Request and How
- Proving Disability Discrimination: Building Your Case
- What Qualifies as a Disability Under the ADA
- Interactive Process: Best Practices for Accommodation Requests
- Mental Health Disabilities: Special Considerations
- Invisible Disabilities in the Workplace
- Disability Discrimination in Remote Work Environments
