Reasonable Accommodation Archives • WSHRC Digest

Reasonable Accommodation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment–Handicapped Persons Regulations, what are the rules concerning reasonable accommodation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning reasonable accommodation. See WAC 162-22-065, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

WAC 162-22-065 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses reasonable accommodation as follows:

(1) Reasonable accommodation means measures that:

(a) Enable equal opportunity in the application process;
(b) Enable the proper performance of the particular job held or desired;
(c) Enable the enjoyment of equal benefits, privileges, or terms and conditions of employment.

(2) Possible examples of reasonable accommodation may include, but are not limited to:

(a) Adjustments in job duties, work schedules, or scope of work;
(b) Changes in the job setting or conditions of work;
(c) Informing the employee of vacant positions and considering the employee for those positions for which the employee is qualified.

WAC 162-22-065 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw

Public Accommodations — Structural Barriers to Accessibility

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning structural barriers to accessibility? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding structural barriers to accessibility. See WAC 162-26-100, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – STRUCTURAL BARRIERS TO ACCESSIBILITY

WAC 162-26-100 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses structural barriers to accessibility as follows:

(1) Laws requiring accessibility. The commission enforces the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60 RCW, not other state or federal laws. The commission provides the following references as guidance to places of public accommodation. The principal laws requiring that places of public accommodation be made accessible include, but are not limited to:

(a) The Washington State Building Code.

(b) Chapter 219, Laws of 1971 ex. sess.

(c) Chapter 35, Laws of 1967.

(d) RCW 35.68.075.

(e) United States law; including The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, codified at 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Federal Fair Housing Act.

(2) Practices that are not unfair. It is not an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 to operate a place of public accommodation with structural barriers to accessibility of the person with a disability when the structural barriers:

(a) Were lawful when constructed; and

(b) Are presently lawful under the state building code and other law outside of the law against discrimination.

This exemption does not relieve the operator of a place of public accommodation of the duty to make reasonable accommodation to the needs of disabled persons as described in WAC 162-26-080.

(3) When required by law. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215:

(a) To deny service to any person because of a barrier to accessibility when accessibility is required by law;

(b) To build or remodel in a way that does not comply with requirements of law on accessibility;

(c) To operate a place of public accommodation that is out of compliance with a law requiring accessibility;

(d) To fail to maintain or fail to continue the accessibility of a place of public accommodation that was required by law to be accessible when it was built, remodeled, or rehabilitated.

(4) Nonstructural changes. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 for a person who is making nonstructural changes in a place of public accommodation to fail to eliminate barriers to same service when this can be done without substantially changing the scope or cost of the project or requiring structural changes that are not otherwise required by law. Specifically, it is an unfair practice:

(a) When installing a nonstructural fixture or component, to choose and install one that is not accessible to the person with a disability or that makes the place of public accommodation less accessible to the person with a disability.

(b) When replacing a nonstructural fixture or component, to replace it with one that is not accessible to the person with a disability or one that makes the place of public accommodation less accessible to the person with a disability.

(c) When relocating a nonstructural fixture or component, to relocate it to a place that is not accessible to the person with a disability, unless no suitable place is accessible.

(d) When modifying a nonstructural fixture or component, to do so in a way that does not eliminate barriers to the person with a disability, when possible.

WAC 162-26-100 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Public Accommodations — Behavior Causing Risk

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning behavior causing risk? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding behavior causing risk. See WAC 162-26-110, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – BEHAVIOR CAUSING RISK

WAC 162-26-110 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses behavior causing risk as follows:

(1) Proviso interpreted. This section interprets the following proviso of RCW 49.60.215:

“Provided, That behavior or actions constituting a risk to property or other persons can be grounds for refusal and shall not constitute an unfair practice.”

(2) General rule. It is not an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 to deny a person service in a place of public accommodation because that person’s behavior or actions constitute a risk to property or other persons.

(3) Individual judgment required. To come within this exception, the denial of service must be based on knowledge of the present behavior or actions of the individual who is not served. It is an unfair practice to exclude all persons who have a disability or who have a particular disability unless the operator of the place of public accommodation can show that all persons with the disability will present a risk to persons or property.

(4) Likelihood of injury. Risk to property or other persons must be immediate and likely, not remote or speculative.

(5) Degree of risk. Risk of injury to persons may be given more weight than risk of injury to property. Risk of severe injury may be given more weight than risk of slight injury.

(6) Risk to person with a disability. Risk to the person with a disability is not a reason to deny service. Law other than the law against discrimination governs liability for injury to customers with a disability. The law against discrimination affects tort liability only insofar as it includes persons with a disability within the public for which public accommodations must be made safe.

(7) Annoyance to staff or other customers. Annoyance on the part of staff or customers of the place of public accommodation at the abnormal appearance or behavior of a person with a disability is not a “risk to property or other persons” justifying nonservice.

(8) Least discriminatory solution required. It is an unfair practice to deny a person with a disability the enjoyment of an entire place of public accommodation because the person presents a risk of injury when using part of the place. When risk justifies not serving a person with a disability in the same way or same place as other customers, the person should be served through reasonable accommodation (WAC 162-26-060, 162-26-080), if possible.

WAC 162-26-110 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Public Accommodation — Reasonable Accommodation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning reasonable accommodation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding reasonable accommodation. See WAC 162-26-080, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

WAC 162-26-080 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses reasonable accommodation as follows:

(1) Unfair practice to not accommodate. It is an unfair practice for a person in the operation of a place of public accommodation to fail or refuse to make reasonable accommodation to the known physical, sensory, or mental limitations of a person with a disability or to the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person, when same service would prevent the person from fully enjoying the place of public accommodation.

(2) Determining reasonableness. Whether a possible accommodation is reasonable or not depends on the cost of making the accommodation, the size of the place of public accommodation, the availability of staff to make the accommodation, the importance of the service to the person with a disability, and other factors bearing on reasonableness in the particular situation.

(3) Carrying not favored. Carrying a mobility-impaired person is not required by law and is not an acceptable accommodation, except in rare circumstances. Carrying should be done only when there is no other way for the mobility-impaired person to use the facility and when it is agreeable to the person with a disability.

(4) “Arranged service.” The concept of “arranged service,” as formerly defined in commission rules, is incorporated fully within the scope of reasonable accommodation.

WAC 162-26-080 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Public Accommodations — General Rules

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the general rules? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding general rules. See WAC 162-26-070, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – GENERAL RULES

WAC 162-26-070 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses general rules as follows:

These rules apply except where exempted by RCW 49.60.215 for structural changes or behavior causing risk, or excepted by ruling of the commissioners under WAC 162-06-030. It is an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.215 for any person in the operation of a place of public accommodation, because of disability or use of a trained dog guide or service animal:

(1) To refuse to serve a person;

(2) To charge for reasonably accommodating the special needs of a disabled person;

(3) To require a disabled person accompanied by a trained dog guide or service animal in any of the places listed in RCW 70.84.010(3) to pay an extra charge for the trained dog guide or service animal;

(4) To treat a disabled person as not welcome, accepted, desired, or solicited the same as a nondisabled person;

(5) To segregate or restrict a person or deny a person the use of facilities or services in connection with the place of public accommodation where same service is possible without regard to the disability; or

(6) To fail to reasonably accommodate the known physical, sensory, or mental limitations of a disabled person, when same service would prevent the person from fully enjoying the place of public accommodation, as provided in WAC 162-26-080.

WAC 162-26-070 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Public Accommodations — General Principles

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what are the rules concerning general principles? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations regarding general principles. See WAC 162-26-060, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – GENERAL PRINCIPLES

WAC 162-26-060 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses general principles as follows:

(1) Same service preferred. The purposes of the law against discrimination are best achieved when disabled persons are treated the same as if they were not disabled. The legislature expresses this policy in RCW 49.60.215 with the words “regardless of.” Persons should, if possible, be treated without regard to their disability or use of a dog guide or service animal. This is called “same service” in this chapter.

(2) Reasonable accommodation. The law protects against discrimination because of the “presence” of a disability. It does not prohibit treating disabled persons more favorably than nondisabled persons in circumstances where same service will defeat the purposes of the law against discrimination.

For example, this would be true if persons in wheelchairs and nondisabled persons are equally entitled to use the stairway to reach the second floor of a store. In such circumstances, the operator of the place of public accommodation should use the next best solution: Reasonable accommodation.

A reasonable accommodation would be to permit the shopper in the wheelchair to use an elevator to reach the second floor, even though the public in general is not permitted to use the elevator. If there is no elevator and no other safe and dignified way for the customer to reach the second floor, another reasonable accommodation would be to bring merchandise requested by the customer to the first floor. Reasonable accommodations may also include, but are not limited to, providing sign language interpreters and making printed materials available in alternate formats.

(3) Overall objective. People with disabilities must be afforded the full enjoyment of places of public accommodation to the greatest extent practical.

WAC 162-26-060 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Public Accommodations — Definition of Reasonable Accommodation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations, what is the definition of reasonable accommodation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt Public Accommodations (Disability Discrimination) regulations defining the term reasonable accommodation. See WAC 162-26-040, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

DEFINITION OF REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

WAC 162-26-040 is the relevant regulation, and it defines the term reasonable accommodation as follows:

…

(2) General definitions special to this chapter. The following words or phrases are used in this chapter in the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning.

…

“Reasonable accommodation” means action, reasonably possible in the circumstances, to make the regular services of a place of public accommodation accessible to persons who otherwise could not use or fully enjoy the services because of the person’s sensory, mental, or physical disability. See WAC 162-26-080.

…

WAC 162-26-040 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Definition of Able Worker With A Disability

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment–Handicapped Persons Regulations, what is the definition of able worker with a disability? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the definition of able worker with a disability. See WAC 162-22-020, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

DEFINITION OF ABLE WORKER WITH A DISABILITY

WAC 162-22-020 is the relevant regulation, and it defines able worker with a disability as follows:

In this chapter the following words are used in the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning:

…

(3) An “able worker with a disability” is a person whose disability does not prevent the proper performance, with or without reasonable accommodation, of the particular job in question.

WAC 162-22-020 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Dog Guides & Service Animals

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment–Handicapped Persons Regulations, what are the rules concerning dog guides and service animals? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the dog guides and service animals. See WAC 162-22-100, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

DOG GUIDES & SERVICE ANIMALS

WAC 162-22-100 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses dog guides and service animals as follows:

(1) General rule. It is an unfair practice for an employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person to request that a trained dog guide or service animal be removed from the workplace, unless that employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person can show that the presence, behavior or actions of that dog guide or service animal constitutes an unreasonable risk to property or other persons.

It is an unfair practice to remove a trained dog guide or service animal from the entire workplace because the animal presents a risk of injury or harm when in part of the workplace.

(2) Assessing risk of injury or harm.

(a) Risk to property or other persons must be immediate or reasonably foreseeable under the circumstances, not remote or speculative. Risk to persons may be given more weight than risk to property. Risk of severe injury or harm may be given more weight than risk of slight injury or harm. For example, a principal excludes a teacher’s dog guide because; “A neighborhood dog bit one of our kids last year, so I don’t allow any dogs at school.” This is not “reasonably foreseeable risk” justifying removal of the dog guide.

(b) Annoyance on the part of staff or other customers of the workplace at the presence of the dog guide or service animal is not an unreasonable “risk to property or other persons” justifying the removal of the dog guide or service animal.

(c) Risk of injury or harm to the dog guide or service animal is not a reason for an employer to remove or exclude the animal. The decision whether to bring the animal to the worksite under such conditions most properly rests with the person with a disability using the dog guide or service animal.

(3) Reasonable accommodation. When risk justifies the removal of a dog guide or service animal from the workplace, efforts must be made to reasonably accommodate the person with the disability.

(4) Liability. Law other than the law against discrimination governs liability for injury or harm. Generally, a person with a disability using a dog guide or service animal is responsible for the animal and may be held liable for the behavior and actions of the animal.

WAC 162-22-100 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Health Care Opinions

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment–Handicapped Persons Regulations, what are the rules concerning health care opinions? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the health care opinions. See WAC 162-22-090, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

HEALTH CARE OPINIONS

WAC 162-22-090 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses health care opinions as follows:

(1) Employers may seek a health care professional’s opinion on whether a person’s disability affects the proper performance of a particular job. The employer may also seek a health care professional’s opinion on possible effective accommodations that would enable the person with a disability to properly perform the job. The health care professional’s opinion will be given due weight in view of all the circumstances, including the extent of the health care professional’s knowledge of the particular person and job, and the health care professional’s relationship to the parties.

(2) A health care professional’s conclusion will not be considered to be an opinion on whether the person can properly perform the particular job unless it:

(a) Is based on the individual capabilities of the particular person, and not on generalizations as to the capabilities of all persons with the same disability; and

(b) Is based on knowledge of the actual sensory, mental, and physical qualifications needed for proper performance of the particular job.

(3) Employers are advised to provide the health care professional with the necessary information about the particular job and to inform the health care professional of the need for an individualized opinion.

(4) Employee health care information shall be kept in a confidential manner, separate from the employee’s regular personnel files. The employer may share health care information only on a need to know basis. Supervisors and/or safety personnel may be informed of employee needs only if necessary to make appropriate work assignments or develop appropriate emergency response plans.

WAC 162-22-090 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Employment–Handicapped Persons–Undue Hardship Exception

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment–Handicapped Persons Regulations, what are the rules concerning the undue hardship exception? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the undue hardship exception. See WAC 162-22-075, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

UNDUE HARDSHIP EXCEPTION

WAC 162-22-075 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses the undue hardship exception as follows:

An employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person must provide reasonable accommodation unless it can prove that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship. An accommodation will be considered an undue hardship if the cost or difficulty is unreasonable in view of:

(1) The size of and the resources available to the employer;

(2) Whether the cost can be included in planned remodeling or maintenance; and

(3) The requirements of other laws and contracts, and other appropriate considerations.

WAC 162-22-075 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity – Leave Policies & Reasonable Accommodation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity Regulations, what are the rules concerning leave policies and reasonable accommodation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning leave policies and reasonable accommodation . See WAC 162-32-020, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

LEAVE POLICIES & REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

WAC 162-32-020 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses leave policies and reasonable accommodation as follows:

(1) Leave. When an employer grants leave or time off of work to employees for medical or health reasons, the employer shall treat leave requests to address medical or health care needs related to an individual’s gender expression or gender identity in the same manner as requests for all other medical conditions. For example:

(a) If an employer provides paid sick leave for periods of disability that require medical leave, the employer must provide paid sick leave for periods of disability related to an individual’s gender expression or gender identity that require medical leave;

(b) If the employer’s policy requires a medical provider’s statement to verify the leave period as a reasonable accommodation, a medical provider’s statement may be required to verify the leave period as a reasonable accommodation when the disabling condition is related to the individual’s gender expression or gender identity, however, an employer may not inquire if the leave is related to gender expression or gender identity or gender transition, nor can the employer require that the note specify if the leave is related to gender expression or gender identity or gender transition;

(c) If the employer’s policy permits the retention and accrual of benefits, such as seniority, retirement, and pension rights, during the leave period for other disabilities, the policy must also permit such accrual of benefits during leave for disabling conditions related to an individual’s gender expression or gender identity;

(d) If an employer allows an employee to use shared leave for disabling conditions, the employer must apply the same policies and procedures for disabling conditions related to an individual’s gender expression or gender identity.

(2) Reasonable accommodation. An employer shall provide reason-able accommodation for a disability when the disability is related to the individual’s gender expression or gender identity, absent undue hardship to the employer. Such reasonable accommodation includes, but is not limited to, medical leave for medical and counseling appointments, surgery, and recovery from surgery that are related to gender reassignment procedures and treatments. An undue hardship as a reason for denying an accommodation in situations involving disabilities related to gender expression or gender identity shall be analyzed in the same manner as with accommodations for any other disability. To the extent consistent with personal medical information connected to other disabilities, personal medical information connected to disabilities related to a person’s gender expression or gender identity must be kept confidential.

(3) Nothing in this section is intended to suggest that a per-son’s sexual orientation or gender expression or gender identity itself is a disabling condition.

WAC 162-32-020 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw