If Telework is an Effective Accommodation – Leave it Alone!

By Deborah J. Hopkins, November 20, 2025

I say this too often: if I had a dollar for every time an agency unlawfully revoked an existing, effective accommodation, I’d be retired and relaxing in a hammock on an island somewhere.

But here I sit, not in a hammock but in the FELTG office writing yet another article about an agency that denied a request for continued telework as accommodation – despite the complainant’s successful performance track record while on telework, and her medical limitations which made commuting impossible. Linda A. v. Army, EEOC Req. No. 2023002848 (Sept. 18, 2023).

So, what exactly happened?

• The complainant, a GS-14 Procurement Analyst, was hospitalized and had to use approximately six weeks of sick leave.
• When she returned to work, management initially allowed her to telework full-time, but later told her she needed to go through the reasonable accommodation (RA) request process in order to continue full-time telework.
• She timely submitted the RA request and provided medical documentation which indicated she could not drive or engage in prolonged standing because of frequent dizziness, chronic headaches, cervical radiculopathy, and impaired fasting glucose.
• The agency denied her request “due to the existence of employee van pools commuting between [Complainant’s] residential area and [her] work site, [which provided Complainant] alternatives to driving daily to work”, as well as the offer of a scooter at work.

Id. at 2-3.

She filed a formal EEO complaint, alleging the agency discriminated against her based on her race (African-American), color (Black), age (over 40), sex (female), and disability. The administrative judge granted the agency summary judgment, and the complainant appealed to the EEOC.

The EEOC determined that the denial of the complainant’s reasonable accommodation was not based on her race, color, age, or sex, but that the agency erred during the reasonable accommodation process.

According to the Commission, the agency’s denial did not include any evidence that granting telework would have caused an undue hardship, because the complainant had already successfully teleworked for several months. In addition, the alternative accommodations the agency offered (a scooter and access to employee van pools) were ineffective because they did not adequately address the full range of the complainant’s documented medical needs.

Id. at 3.

As to the agency’s reconsideration request, the EEOC determined the agency did not demonstrate that its decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, so its initial order requiring the agency to provide the complainant with an effective accommodation and pay compensatory damages, remained in effect.

If you encounter authorities in your agency that want to eliminate or severely restrict telework as accommodation, it would behoove them to read this case, which unfortunately is just one out of many with similar facts and conclusions. The law is well settled here. [email protected]

 

Related training

• Telework as Reasonable Accommodation for Disability, Pregnancy, and Religion (recording)
• Get it Right the First Time: Accepting, Dismissing, and Framing EEO Claims, Jan. 27-28, 2026
• Calling All Counselors: Initial 32-Hour Plus EEO Refresher Training, Feb. 23-26, 2026

The information presented here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Contacting FELTG in any way/format does not create the existence of an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, you should contact an attorney.