Madeline Earles, left, and Melissa Losch, right, of McGlinchey Stafford. Courtesy photos Understanding Reasonable Accommodations Under the ADA and PWFA
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) both require employers with 15 or more employees to provide…
October 28, 2024 at 01:57 PM
8 minute read
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) both require employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations that will enable employees to perform the function of their job with respect to disability and pregnancy, respectively. While the ADA and PWFA coexist rather harmoniously, there are a number of differences one should be aware of when operating under the relative acts, particularly with respect to providing reasonable accommodations.
Purpose of the ADA and PWFA
The ADA is designed to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability by requiring employers to provide qualified individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from the full range of employment opportunities available to others by virtue of reasonable accommodations.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Troutman Pepper Says Ex-Associate Who Alleged Racial Discrimination Lost Job Because of Failure to Improve
6 minute read
Boosting Litigation and Employee Benefits Practices, Two Am Law 100 Firms Grow in Pittsburgh
3 minute read
Best Practices for Conducting Workplace Investigations: A Legal and HR Perspective
9 minute read
The Intersection of Labor Law and Politics Following the Presidential Election
8 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'A Shock to the System’: Some Government Attorneys Are Forced Out, While Others Weigh Job Options
- 2Lackawanna County Lawyer Fails to Shake Legal Mal Claims Over Sex With Client
- 3Florida Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss in $150M Plane Crash Lawsuit Involving Flow La Movie
- 4HSF Accounts Show US Operating Losses Last Year But Revenue Increased Slightly
- 5Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
