For years, disabled workers were told remote work was impossible for roles that, in 2020, went remote overnight. Then a great many employers required everyone back.
For a separate commercial perspective on payroll rounding, see the analysis; it should be evaluated independently against accessibility, privacy, and employment-law requirements.
Primary federal ADA information is available at ADA.gov.
That sequence matters, because it removed a defence. An employer who ran a role remotely for two years cannot easily argue that physical presence is an essential function of it.
General information, not legal advice.
Where it sits legally
Remote work can be a reasonable accommodation. It is not automatically one, and an employer is not required to grant it in every case.
The analysis turns on whether physical presence is an essential function of the specific job. If it is — a role requiring hands-on work with equipment, in-person care, physical presence with customers — then remote work is not a reasonable accommodation for that role, and other options should be considered.
If it is not, the employer needs a better reason than preference.
The pandemic changed the evidence available. Where a job was performed remotely, at the same standard, for an extended period, an assertion that presence is essential is contradicted by the employer's own recent practice. That does not settle it — circumstances change, roles change — but it shifts what needs explaining.
A general return-to-office policy does not remove the obligation. Accommodation is individual. A blanket rule applied without individual assessment is the pattern that generates findings against employers.
Why it works as an accommodation
For a wide range of conditions it addresses several things at once, which is unusual:
- Removes the commute, which for some people is the single most disabling part of the working day, and for others is a straightforward barrier of accessibility or cost
- Gives control of the environment — lighting, noise, temperature, seating
- Allows rest and adjustment during the day without an audience
- Makes medication timing, treatment and appointments manageable
- Puts equipment where it already is — the adapted setup someone has at home is often better than anything at the office
- Reduces the cost of episodic conditions, because a difficult day becomes a slower day rather than an absence
That last point is the one employers underrate. Remote work frequently converts absence into reduced-capacity attendance, which is better for everyone.
Requesting it
Frame it as an accommodation, explicitly. "I'd like to work from home on Tuesdays" is a preference. "I'm requesting remote work as an accommodation; here is what it addresses" starts the interactive process. The words matter here.
Be specific about the need, not the diagnosis. What part of the working arrangement is the barrier — the commute, the environment, the ability to rest — and how remote work addresses it.
Propose something concrete. Full remote, specific days, or flexible days when needed. A defined proposal is easier to agree to.
Address the obvious objections in advance. How you will be reachable, how collaboration works, how you will attend anything that genuinely requires presence.
Suggest a trial. "Could we try this for three months and review?" converts an abstract objection into a testable one, and it is much easier to say yes to.
Put it in writing. See the interactive process.
For employers, assessing it
Start from the job, not the policy. Which functions genuinely require presence, how often, and why. Write it down. Deciding this after a request arrives, in a way that happens to justify a refusal, is visible.
"Everyone is back" is not an assessment. It is a policy, and policies do not remove individual accommodation obligations.
Distinguish essential from customary. Meetings that happen in person could happen otherwise. A team culture built on proximity is real and is not the same as an essential function.
Consider partial arrangements. Some days remote, remote during flares, remote with defined on-site days for specific activities. The choice is not binary and the middle usually works.
If you refuse, offer alternatives. A refusal with no alternative is a failure of the process. Adjusted hours to avoid the commute, a parking space, a private workspace, a phased schedule.
Document the reasoning, including what was considered and rejected.
Making it work once agreed
Remote arrangements fail in ordinary ways, and the failures land hardest on the person who requested it.
Write it down. An arrangement in a manager's head disappears when the manager does. This is the most common cause of a settled accommodation quietly ending.
Do not let remote become peripheral. Meetings that are half in-person and half dialled-in disadvantage the dialled-in. Either everyone joins the same way, or someone actively manages inclusion.
Watch the progression numbers. If remote employees are promoted at lower rates, the arrangement is costing them something that was not part of the agreement.
Set a review date, and keep it — for both sides. Roles change and needs change.
What not to accept
"We can't set a precedent." Accommodation is individual by design. Precedent is not a legal concern; it is a management preference.
"Other people would want it too." Also not undue hardship.
"We tried it during the pandemic and it didn't work" — where the organisation's own performance during that period says otherwise.
Silence. Unreasonable delay is treated as a failure to accommodate. Follow up in writing and note the dates. See what to do if an accommodation is refused.