The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued a national transportation company, Schneider National Inc., and alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

According to the allegations, Schneider National extended a conditional employment offer to a qualified candidate in September 2023. One day later, Schneider National allegedly withdrew the job offer because it learned that the applicant has post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and requires a service dog.

Schneider allegedly requested additional information from the applicant, in response to which the applicant disclosed that her dog is certified as a service animal and is trained to alleviate and prevent PTSD symptoms. Further, her dog has successfully accompanied the applicant in the truck when the applicant trained for, and obtained, her Class A commercial driver's license.

Schneider allegedly refused to allow the applicant to drive with her service dog as an accommodation for her PTSD, and withdrew the job offer.

Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-schneider-national-disability-discrimination

Commentary

In the above matter, the EEOC alleged that a certified and trained service animal was treated as a policy violation or inconvenience, rather than as a reasonable accommodation.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, an ADA service animal is defined as a dog that has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability. The task(s) performed by the dog must be directly related to the person's disability. https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/

When a qualified individual requires a service animal to perform the essential functions of their job, outright denying that service animal as an accommodation without engaging in the interactive process is no different than refusing non-animal related accommodations.

For individuals with PTSD, service dogs can play a crucial role as a complementary intervention by performing tasks that directly mitigate the symptoms. For example, such dogs may provide deep pressure therapy to reduce anxiety, nudge their handler during flashbacks to redirect attention, or create a safe physical buffer in crowded or stressful environments.

In the above case, the fact that the applicant had already trained and obtained her license with her service dog in the truck is evidence that the service dog was effective as an accommodation and makes the refusal to accommodate even more difficult to justify.

Inflexible policies applied without engaging in the interactive process create risk.

In order to help reduce the risks, employers should consider the following:

· Treat every service animal related accommodation request as a legitimate reasonable accommodation request, not as a personal preference or comfort

· Request documentation only to confirm the animal is trained as a service animal

· Engage in a genuine interactive process with the employee or applicant, documenting every step including why an accommodation was allowed or denied

· Evaluate the specific job, environment, or safety concerns related to an accommodate on a case-by-case basis, not based on a blanket prohibition

· Involve local legal counsel before withdrawing any job offer connected to a disclosed disability or accommodation request