Workforce Bulletin

When ADA Compliance Feels Daunting, Dov Lutzker Offers a Clear Path Forward

Navigating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) can feel overwhelming for employers, especially in a post-pandemic world where remote work and accommodations are at the forefront. But what if there were a way to approach these challenges with confidence and clarity?

Meet Dov Lutzker, a seasoned attorney with over two decades of experience enforcing the ADA at the U.S. Department of Justice, where he worked alongside the very people who shaped the law.

In this one-on-one conversation with fellow Epstein Becker Green attorney George Whipple, Dov shares his unique perspective on ADA compliance, offering practical insights for employers.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday®: This week, we examine a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York addressing remote work requests and disability accommodations.

A recent federal ruling clarified that denying a request for full-time remote work as a disability accommodation does not, by itself, constitute discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or the Rehabilitation Act.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Eric I. Emanuelson, Jr., discusses what the ruling means for employers navigating remote work requests and disability accommodations.

The EEOC’s Shift Away from Disparate Impact Liability

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibit employers from implementing facially neutral procedures that unintentionally discriminate against individuals based on their protected categories. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency tasked with investigating claims of unintentional discrimination, called disparate impact.

According to an internal memorandum obtained by Bloomberg Law, the EEOC plans on closing all pending disparate impact discrimination charges based at the end of September 2025. Once these charges are closed, the EEOC is expected to issue right-to-sue letters allowing claimants to file their case in federal court. Charges that involve claims of both disparate impact and disparate treatment are likely to remain with the EEOC in normal course.

To honor the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), on July 26, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) signed a long-awaited final rule to improve access to medical diagnostic equipment (MDE) for people with disabilities (the “MDE Regulations”). Stressing that accessible MDE is essential for people with disabilities to have equal access to medical care and avoid poor health outcomes, the MDE Regulations, which were published by the Federal Register on August 9, 2024, amend Title II of the ADA (“Title II”) and apply to hospitals and health care clinics operated by state or local governments. The MDE Regulations create enforceable minimum standards for accessible design (as initially issued by the U.S. Access Board) covering MDE, including examination tables, weight scales, dental chairs, x-ray machines, mammography machines, and other radiological equipment commonly used for diagnostic purposes by health care professionals.

In full, the MDE Regulations and the accessibility standards they incorporate stand well in excess of 100 pages. To help our clients more readily understand what the MDE Regulations do and do not require, we are answering some of the most commonly asked questions here.

Is the developer of an AI resume-screening tool an “employment agency” or “agent” subject to liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for its customers’ allegedly discriminatory employment decisions? According to the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), the answer is yes. On April 9, 2024, the EEOC filed a motion for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae, together with a brief, in Mobley v. Workday, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-00770-RFL, to support plaintiff Derek Mobley’s (“Mobley”) motion to dismiss.

The EEOC’s action is ...