Former postal employee may pursue suit over work from home
[ad_1]
A former U.S. Postal Service employee can pursue her lawsuit in which she sought to work from home mornings because of a painful nerve condition that flares up early in the day, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in overturning a lower court ruling.
Dionne Montague worked as a public relations employee for the U.S. Postal Service in the Houston area from 2009 to 2017, according to the divided opinion by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans in Dionne A. Montague v. United States Postal Service.
Ms. Montague, who suffers from peripheral neuropathy, can drive to the office in the afternoon, but asked the postal service to let her work mornings from home as needed and report to the office each afternoon.
The postal service denied her request on the basis that driving and travel were essential to her job, and she was terminated, according to the complaint in the case. She sued in U.S. District Court in Houston, charging violation of the Rehabilitation Act.
The district court ruled in the postal service’s favor, and was overturned by an appeals court panel in a 2-1 ruling.
The central disagreement in this case is whether travel and mornings in the office were essential to her job, the majority opinion said. “To begin with Montague raises a genuine fact question about whether travel was essential,” it said.
The summary judgment record “permits the inference” that Ms. Montague could have performed aspects of her job involving travel during the afternoon, it said, adding her written job description does not mention travel as an essential part of her job.
The ruling also says Ms. Montague has pointed out that two of her colleagues were permitted to work from home.
It said the post office suggested as alternatives that her husband could drive her to the office, and she could also take a taxi. Ms. Montague responded that her husband was not always available, and the postal service never offered to reimburse her taxi expenses, which she could not afford, the ruling said, in overturning the lower court’s decision.
The dissenting opinion said a request to work from home is “an extraordinary accommodation that should require extraordinary justification,” which has not been provided.
Ms. Montague’s attorney, Ashok Bail, of the Bail Law Firm in Houston, said in a statement, “We are very pleased with the decision, and we are looking forward to a trial in this matter.”
The postal services’ attorney did not respond to a request for comment.
[ad_2]
Source link
