Failure to Engage in the Interactive Process
California employers must begin a timely, good faith conversation about accommodations as soon as they learn an employee may need one.
When an employer learns that an employee may need an accommodation for a disability, it must begin a timely, good faith conversation about what would work. Government Code section 12940(n) makes that conversation a legal obligation in its own right. An employer can be held liable for failing to engage even in situations where no accommodation would ultimately have been possible.
Why This Is a Separate Claim
Failure to accommodate and failure to engage in the interactive process are distinct violations. The first concerns the outcome, and the second concerns the process. California courts have confirmed that the duty to communicate is independently enforceable, which means an employee may prevail on an interactive process claim even where the employer proves that a particular accommodation would have imposed undue hardship. The two claims are commonly pleaded together because the same facts support both.
Case Results
What Triggers the Duty
The obligation begins as soon as the employer has notice that an employee may need an adjustment. Notice can come from any of the following sources:
treating provider
disability leave paperwork
member or a coworker
a condition affecting the work
The employee is not required to identify a specific accommodation, to provide a diagnosis, or to use the word disability. Once the employer is on notice, the responsibility to start the conversation belongs to the employer.
What Good Faith Participation Looks Like
- Responding promptly instead of letting the request sit
- Meeting with the employee to discuss limitations and job duties
- Requesting only the medical information needed to evaluate the request
- Considering more than one possible accommodation
- Explaining in writing why a proposed accommodation was rejected
- Revisiting the arrangement when the employee’s condition or the job changes
- Keeping a written record of the exchange
Signs the Process Broke Down
- No response at all to a documented request
- A flat refusal with no discussion of alternatives
- Weeks or months of unexplained delay
- Demanding a complete medical file as a condition of any conversation
- Cutting off communication after the first suggestion is rejected
- Placing the employee on unpaid leave instead of exploring accommodations
- Insisting that the employee propose an accommodation while offering none
Both sides are expected to participate. If an employee refuses to provide reasonable information or abandons the discussion, that can affect the claim. This is one more reason for employees to document every response they give and every request they make.
Building the Record
Interactive process cases are usually decided on documents. Emails, text messages, human resources portal entries, provider notes, and calendar entries showing when meetings were requested and whether they happened all help establish the timeline. A short written summary sent after a verbal conversation is often the most useful record an employee can create.
Deadlines and Remedies
A complaint must be filed with the California Civil Rights Department within three years of the last unlawful act, and a lawsuit must be filed within one year of the right to sue notice. Damages are measured against what would likely have happened if the employer had engaged in good faith, and may include back pay, lost benefits, front pay or reinstatement, emotional distress damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and punitive damages where the employer’s conduct was malicious, fraudulent, or oppressive.
- 601 S Glenoaks Blvd Ste 201, Burbank, CA 91502
- 3200 Guasti Rd. Suite 100, Ontario, CA 91761