How an Employer Won an ADA Case by Offering a Different Job Instead of More Leave

 

A recent Eleventh Circuit decision highlights that offering reassignment instead of extending medical leave can be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA when the reassignment fits the employee’s restrictions and the circumstances. The court said the employer acted lawfully by offering another available position rather than more leave, which the employee declined.

---

TL;DR: The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment on an ADA discrimination claim involving a sworn law-enforcement role. The court said there was a genuine factual dispute about whether the employee would have been “qualified” by his requested return-to-work date, but still ruled for the employer because it offered a reasonable accommodation, reassignment to an open non-sworn position, which the employee declined, placing him outside the ADA’s protections.
🔗Read the decision (PDF)

---

A request for more leave versus an offer to reassign

After several years in law enforcement, the employee began experiencing significant back problems linked to an earlier on-duty injury. His doctors restricted him from key physical tasks such as running, climbing, and restraining suspects, all essential functions of his sworn position.

He took leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to undergo two back surgeries in December. His medical provider gave a tentative return-to-work date of March 14, which he shared with his supervisors.

When his FMLA leave neared exhaustion, the employer requested updated medical documentation. The employee asked to extend his leave through mid-March. Instead, the employer offered reassignment to an open non-sworn dispatcher position while he recovered. Supervisors reiterated the offer several times and confirmed their full support for the transfer.

The employee did not accept the reassignment and instead renewed his request for more leave. When he failed to respond by the employer’s stated deadline, his employment was terminated in February, about a month before his proposed return date.

Medical notes were mixed. The employee testified that by early March he was cleared to return, but his providers continued to document ongoing pain and uncertainty about whether he could complete the department’s physical abilities test.

What the court actually decided

The Eleventh Circuit’s decision ultimately turned on the accommodation issue. The ADA requires an employer to offer a reasonable accommodation that enables an employee to perform the essential functions of the job, but it does not require the employer to provide the employee’s preferred one.

Here, the employee asked for more leave so he could continue recovering. Instead, the employer offered reassignment to an open non-sworn dispatcher position that matched his physical limitations. The court found that this offer was a reasonable accommodation under the circumstances.

Reassignment to a vacant position is one of the accommodations expressly recognized by the ADA. The employer explained the role, confirmed that leadership supported the move, and encouraged the employee to apply. When he declined, the court said that decision placed him outside the ADA’s protections.

The court emphasized that an employee who refuses a reasonable accommodation cannot later claim the employer failed to engage in the interactive process or denied accommodation altogether. Even though the lower court relied on a different rationale, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed because the employer’s reassignment offer satisfied its obligations under the ADA.

Practical takeaways for employers

Offer reasonable alternatives.
If an employee requests additional leave, consider whether another available position could meet both the employee’s medical restrictions and your operational needs. Reassignment to a vacant role can satisfy the ADA when it is reasonable under the circumstances.

Document every step.
Put each offer and response in writing. Showing that you identified a vacant position, explained it to the employee, and encouraged them to apply can make the difference between a defensible decision and a costly dispute.

The ADA requires reasonableness, not preference.
Employers do not have to grant the specific accommodation an employee requests. Offering a reasonable option that works for the business is enough.

Define essential functions clearly.
When an employee cannot perform a job’s physical or safety-sensitive duties, ensure those requirements are well documented and consistently applied. Accurate job descriptions are key evidence if litigation arises.

The bottom line

This decision underscores that the ADA may allow employers to offer reassignment instead of more leave, but only when that offer is reasonable under the circumstances. The court found that because the alternative position was vacant, aligned with the employee’s restrictions, and was offered through a good-faith interactive process, the employer met its legal obligations when the employee declined it.