RIGHT SPEAK: Fourth Circuit Rules for Employer When Employee Failed to Participate in Interactive Process; UK: Government ‘passive’ In Recovering £1.9bn of Covid Loan Losses, MPs Warn, and other C-Virus related stories

Fourth Circuit Rules for Employer When Employee Failed to Participate in Interactive Process:

In a recent decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted the requirement that employees requesting an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) must engage in the interactive process with their employers. The court in Tarquinio v. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab affirmed that the employer acted reasonably in requesting medical documentation and that the employee’s refusal to provide this information justified the denial of her accommodation request and her ultimate discharge.

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab required all employees to be vaccinated or obtain an exemption, in order to comply with then-applicable federal contractor mandates. A systems engineer requested a medical exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement. According to the court, in support of her request, she submitted a 2012 blood test and a form signed by her healthcare provider, citing “chronic Lyme Disease [and] Lyme-induced immune dysregulation.” It was not clear, however, why the employee’s condition prevented her from getting the vaccine. The employer requested updated medical documentation and permission to communicate with her doctors to verify her condition and understand why the COVID-19 vaccine was contraindicated for her. Despite multiple requests from the employer, the employee refused to provide current medical documentation or allow the employer to contact her doctors. Instead, she repeatedly reiterated her fear of introducing the COVID-19 vaccine into her system due to alleged lingering effects of Lyme disease.

The employer concluded that there was no evidence that Lyme disease should affect an individual’s ability to be vaccinated for COVID-19 and that it was not a CDC-recognized clinical contraindication. The employer denied the employee’s accommodation request as “insufficiently supported” and subsequently terminated her employment for not complying with the vaccination policy.

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer, and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, holding that the employee’s refusal to provide the necessary medical information prevented the employer from understanding her condition and determining an appropriate accommodation. The court emphasized that the interactive process is an important part of determining reasonable accommodations and that employers have the right to request and verify medical information to confirm the need for accommodations. According to the Fourth Circuit, because of the employee’s refusal to engage in that process, the employer had no duty to accommodate her request.

Clarification on the Interactive Process under the ADA --->READ MORE HERE

Government ‘passive’ in recovering £1.9bn of Covid loan losses, MPs warn:

The Government has been “dangerously flat-footed” in its approach to recovering nearly £2 billion in estimated taxpayer losses from the Covid bounce back loan scheme, MPs have warned.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) – comprised of cross-party MPs – criticised the lack of incentive for lenders to recover the money.

The bounce back loan scheme was set up in the early days of the Covid-19 lockdowns when businesses across the country were forced to close or faced a drop-off in demand.

It provided loans of up to £50,000 per business, and were available to most UK firms without the usual credit and affordability checks in order to be issued more quickly.

However, the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) estimated that total losses due to fraud on the bounce back loan scheme will be at least £1.9 billion – with the figure likely to be higher as not all fraudulent cases had been identified.

The DBT also said that some £130 million worth of losses had so far been recovered from the bounce back scheme – but said it was not possible to identify how much related to borrowers contracting them fraudulently. --->READ MORE HERE