Is Your Employer Actually Aware Of Your Disability?

One of the fundamental requirements of a disability discrimination claim is that the employer knew, or reasonably should have known, that the employee had a disability. For obvious reasons, an employer cannot be held liable for discriminating on the basis of a disability it did not know existed.

An employer “knows an employee has a disability” when (1) “the employee tells the employer about his condition,” or (2) “the employer otherwise becomes aware of the condition, such as through a third party or by observation.” Faust v. California Portland Cement Co. (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 864, 887. When neither the employee nor a third party informs the employer of the disability, California law imposes a much higher standard. In that situation, knowledge will be imputed to the employer based solely on its observations only when “the fact of disability is the only reasonable interpretation of the known facts.” Featherstone v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 1150, 1167.

This is a pretty difficult standard to satisfy. If an employee has not disclosed a medical condition or requested an accommodation, it is often challenging to prove that the employer should have recognized that unusual behavior or performance issues were caused by a disability rather than something else, especially when the condition at issue is mental rather than physical.

The California Court of Appeal recently reaffirmed this principle in Husband v. Target Corporation. The plaintiff argued that his conduct should have alerted Target that he suffered from bipolar disorder. The court disagreed, explaining:

While emotional and irrational conduct is a symptom of bipolar disorder and while one reasonable interpretation of that behavior is that plaintiff suffered from a mental disability, that is not “the only reasonable interpretation” of plaintiff’s behavior. For example, plaintiff’s conduct could also reasonably be interpreted as the side effect of illegal drug use, prescribed medications, or sleep deprivation.

The above decision highlights an important point for both employees and employers. Employers are not required to speculate about an employee’s medical condition. Even behavior that ultimately proves to be related to a disability may not be enough to put an employer on legal notice if there are other reasonable explanations for that behavior.

Many employees with legitimate mental health conditions, such as depression, bipolar disorder, and OCD understandably hesitate to disclose their diagnosis. Concerns about privacy, stigma, and workplace bias are real and should not be minimized. Nevertheless, if an employee intends to request a reasonable accommodation or later claim that an employer failed to accommodate a disability, withholding information about the condition can create significant legal obstacles.

From a practical standpoint, employees are generally better served by providing enough information to clearly notify the employer that they have a qualifying medical condition and explaining the resulting work-related limitations. The employee does not necessarily have to disclose every detail of the diagnosis, but the employer should receive sufficient information to understand that it has a legal duty to engage in the interactive process and evaluate a reasonable accommodation.