Leave & Accommodations

The FMLA provides eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave per year for specific family and medical reasons. The ADA requires employers to provide "reasonable accommodations" for employees with disabilities, as long as it does not cause an "undue hardship." To trigger your rights, you must notify your employer of your need for leave or an accommodation. Use the names of the laws ("I need FMLA leave," "I am requesting a reasonable accommodation under the ADA") to make your rights clear.

Scenario 1: The Ineligible Employee. An employee has only worked at a company for six months when he needs to take time off for surgery. Because he has not met the 12-month requirement, he is not eligible for FMLA leave. His job is not protected.

Scenario 2: The Unreasonable Request. An employee with a back condition requests that the company buy him a $5,000 ergonomic chair. The company determines that a $300 chair provides the same level of support. The company is only required to provide an effective accommodation, not the employee's preferred one. The $300 chair is a reasonable accommodation.

Scenario 3: The Failure to Engage. An employee with social anxiety disorder requests to work from home full-time. The employer refuses without any discussion. This is a failure to engage in the interactive process and is a violation of the ADA.

Scenario 4: The Intermittent Leave. An employee needs to take two days off every month for chemotherapy treatments. This is a valid use of intermittent FMLA leave.

Scenario 5: The Retaliation. An employee returns from FMLA leave and finds that she has been demoted to a lower-paying job. This is FMLA retaliation and is illegal. DECODER RING: Serious Health Condition A key legal term meaning an illness, injury, or condition that involves either inpatient care (an overnight hospital stay) or continuing treatment by a health care provider. A common cold is not a serious health condition. A chronic condition like diabetes or a need for surgery is. The Algorithmic Shadow: When the Algorithm Denies Your Leave Automated attendance and leave management systems can be particularly dangerous for workers with disabilities or those needing FMLA leave. An algorithm that automatically tracks and penalizes absences may not be programmed to distinguish between an unexcused absence and a legally protected medical leave. This creates a direct conflict between automated efficiency and the legal requirement to provide reasonable accommodations under the ADA and to honor FMLA-protected leave. The "the computer did it" defense does not work. The EEOC has been unequivocal: the ADA's reasonable accommodation requirements apply with full force to AI-driven employment decisions. Consider Sarah's situation from this chapter. If her employer used an automated attendance system, her pregnancy-related absences and her subsequent need for FMLA leave could have been flagged by the algorithm as excessive absenteeism, triggering an automatic disciplinary action or even termination recommendation. The system would not know, or care, that her absences were legally protected. This is not a hypothetical risk. In EEOC v. iTutorGroup, the Commission secured a $365,000 settlement after an AI hiring tool automatically rejected older applicants. The same principle applies to leave management: if an algorithm systematically penalizes workers who take legally protected leave, the employer is liable for the resulting discrimination. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) of 2023 adds a critical new dimension. The PWFA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. An automated system that does not account for PWFA accommodations, such as modified schedules, additional breaks, or temporary reassignment, is a ticking legal time bomb for the employer. Similarly, the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act of 2022 requires employers to provide reasonable break time and a private space for nursing employees. Automated scheduling systems that do not build in these legally required breaks are violating federal law. The failure of AI to accommodate is no longer a hypothetical, it is now the subject of a major federal lawsuit. In November 2025, more than 200 disabled corporate employees at Amazon filed suit against the company, alleging that its AI-driven performance management systems systematically violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. The heart of the complaint is devastatingly simple: the automated systems had no mechanism to account for the impact of a disability on a worker's performance metrics. The algorithm measured everyone against the same targets, with no capacity for the nuance that the ADA's interactive process demands. Consider what this means in practice. A worker with a chronic pain condition requests, and receives, approval from her human manager for additional break time. The manager agrees. But the algorithm does not know. It sees only a dip in her productivity score. It flags her for a performance warning. She requests an accommodation from the system, but there is no process to request one, because the system was not designed with accommodation in mind. The algorithm does not discriminate intentionally. It discriminates by omission. It was built for a worker without a disability, and everyone who does not fit that mold is penalized. This is the new frontier of ADA litigation. The question is no longer just whether a human manager refused to accommodate you. The question is whether the system your employer built , the algorithm that tracks, scores, and judges your work , was designed to accommodate you at all. If it was not, and if that failure results in an adverse employment action, you may have a viable claim under the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, or your state's disability rights law. Your action step is the same as it has always been, but with a critical addition: when you request an accommodation, document not only the request and the response, but also how your employer's automated systems measure your performance. Ask specifically: "Will my accommodation be reflected in the productivity tracking system?" If the answer is no, or if no one can answer the question, that is evidence. Preserve it. The legal landscape is rapidly evolving to confront this new frontier. The Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) requires employers to conduct impact assessments for high-risk AI systems, a category that includes automated leave and attendance management tools. Illinois law now requires employers to provide notice if an AI is used in decisions regarding discipline or discharge, which squarely covers automated attendance penalties. These laws provide a legal hook to demand transparency about how the algorithm treats your protected leave. Plaintiff-Side Insight: If you were penalized, disciplined, or terminated after taking FMLA leave, ADA-protected leave, or pregnancy-related leave, and your employer uses an automated attendance or scheduling system, demand immediate disclosure of how the system categorized your absences. Was your protected leave coded differently from unexcused absences? Was the algorithm programmed to exclude FMLA-protected time from its attendance calculations? If the answer is no, you have a powerful claim that the employer failed to reasonably accommodate you by failing to properly configure its own automated systems. The algorithm is not an excuse; it is evidence. CLOCKED IN Clocked In Use the Magic Words: Specifically invoke the FMLA or ADA in your written request to trigger your legal rights. The Doctor is Your Key: A clear, supportive note from your doctor is essential for both leave and accommodation requests. Engage in the Process: You have a duty to cooperate with your employer to find a reasonable accommodation. Work with them to find a solution. In the next chapter, we turn to privacy and speech , the boundaries of what your employer can monitor, and what you can say. US E T H E S E W O R D S : R E Q U E S T I N G A RE A S O N A B L E A C C O M M O D A T I O N "I am writing to request a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act [and/or the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act]. I have [briefly describe your condition or limitation , you do not need to disclose your full diagnosis]. This condition affects my ability to [describe the specific job function affected]. I am requesting the following accommodation: [describe what you need , e.g., modified schedule, ergonomic equipment, additional breaks, telework, temporary reassignment]. I am happy to discuss alternative accommodations through the interactive process. Please let me know the next steps and who I should contact to discuss this request." Send by email. Save a copy. If your employer does not respond within a reasonable time (typically 1-2 weeks), follow up in writing and note the date of your original request. Adapt this language to your specific situation. This is a starting point, not legal advice. Before You Move On ▢ ▢ ▢ ▢ ▢ CH A P T E R 1 0 A C T I O N C H E C K L I S T I have submitted a written accommodation request using the template in this chapter I understand the interactive process and my role in it I have documented my employer's response (or lack of response) to my request I know the difference between FMLA leave, ADA accommodations, and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act I have preserved medical documentation supporting my need for accommodation (stored at home) SECTION SUMMARY This chapter explains your rights to take time off from work for medical or family reasons. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provides up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave. Additionally, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires your employer to provide reasonable accommodations if you have a disability, such as modifying your job duties. To exercise these rights, it is crucial to notify your employer in writing, reference the specific laws, and provide supporting medical documentation.