4 ms·
Remote work was a medical requirement for me and even in those circumstances Google refused to consider it. They also insisted part-time work wasn't an option (
by kevingadd 9y ago
Remote work was a medical requirement for me and even in those circumstances Google refused to consider it. They also insisted part-time work wasn't an option (there were official policies for it that were kept secret!). So likewise, that was really all it took. It baffles me that companies can't be remotely flexible on these things - over 50% of the Google employees I interacted with daily were in other offices (or overseas, for that matter), so the cost of remote workers was already being paid.
- electrograv 9y ago> Remote work was a medical requirement for me and even in those circumstances Google refused to consider it. Certainly that must be illegal under the ADA, or something similar?
- bspn 9y agoIANAL but I don't think it's necessarily illegal by default under the ADA. The first thing the employee has to do is establish that their condition falls under a protected class and then they can request an accommodation. If the employer can demonstrate that there's no way to reasonably accommodate the employee then I believe they're off the hook - that is a much higher burden for a large company to satisfy than say for a small 10 person start-up.
- prepend 9y agoDepending on the position working remotely is reasonable or unreasonable as determined by the company. I think it’s pretty typical to say coming into the office is a requirement so full time remote would not be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. I think the reason why many companies don’t allow as a rule is that by selectively allowing remote work, they are vulnerable to ADA suits.
- DamnYuppie 9y agoIf it was an existing condition or not a work related injury then most likely they have no legal recourse.
- FlyingBears 9y agoCompanies can choose not to be flexible about remote work because IBM ...