The EEOC continued to challenge allegedly inflexible rules that prevented workers with restrictions from returning or required them to remain on leave. The central concern is whether a blanket policy replaced an individualized assessment.
The Dunkin’ allegations
The EEOC alleged that Massachusetts franchisees used a no-restrictions approach, placed some workers on unpaid leave, and failed to assess whether they could perform essential duties with accommodation. The matter resolved through a consent decree without a trial finding.
Restrictions are not the same as inability
A restriction may affect an essential function, a marginal task, a schedule, or a particular environment. Relevant evidence can include the job description, actual daily duties, the doctor’s stated limits, proposed changes, and objective safety information.
Important limits
Not every request must be granted, and employers may address genuine direct-threat, licensing, safety, or undue-hardship concerns. The analysis should be based on current evidence and the actual job rather than a slogan alone.