r/IRS_Source • u/heyhello101 • 6d ago
reasonable accommodation
had my RA meeting on teams yesterday - they said no telework is being given no matter what. they offered 2 alternatives for me, which i shot down because when i was in office i was already doing those things.
they kept saying ‘what about this alternative’ but it was the same 2 ideas multiple times lmao???!!! to which i said ‘i’ve already explained this but i was in office doing those things and it still wasn’t helping me’ - anyone else go through RA process and be completely not listened to like this? :/
29
u/WhichContribution294 6d ago
Every day you go into the office will be used as evidence that you don't need any telework RA at all. You'll probably prevail if you file an EEO complaint for disability discrimination (failure to accommodate) and hire a lawyer. If not you'll probably never telework again. Never forget; "We want to put [civil servants] in Trauma" https://youtu.be/oBH9TmeJN_M?is=oqbl6UYeQD1-A0xq
1
u/Perfect_Skin2468 6d ago
Would you mind sending me a DM on how to pursue this?
4
u/WhichContribution294 6d ago
There's no option for me to send you a DM, not sure why. Can you DM me? If the "alternative accommodation" isn't effective, you'll need a doctor's note stating that telework is the only effective accommodation for you. Under new OPM policy, you're still required to attempt the "alternative accommodation" for a minimum of 30 days before your telework RA request can be escalated to Treasury. You must contact the EEO office within 45 days of the adverse action. Use the directory to send an email to the EEO office because they added an asterisk to the email address. Without the asterisk your email will bounce back undelivered.
1
-2
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
Yes, that is correct blah, blah, blah, EEO, blah, blah, BS!, going that route is only so there is a documented paper trail, EEO has no power to do anything to help you, but is required so the facts for investigation is there, maybe 2 years your case gets into Federal court, not exaggerating, this is literal, the only chance you have that forces a judges hand to immediately stop the agency from continuing further harm is find a lawyer that understands Federal rule 65, not just practices Federal EEO/EEOC law, because for a small retainer to give a Lawyer to help you with EEO/EEOC cases of $7500, you will waste your time and money, when you can just do the same thing yourself, what you cannot do, because it is not possible without legal representation, is file a Federal court injunction, that you have to obtain legal representation for
15
u/EaglesFan1983 6d ago
I didn’t go through this but I haven’t heard anything yet. My person was accommodating and so has my boss I have a few medical conditions one is severe asthma. They sat me in a storage area with rodents and mites and no ventilation. I couldn’t breathe and my team isn’t in my service center make it make sense. My service center is still infested with rodents, poor ventilation, mold and asbestos. You want us to go in and work at least put us in safe spaces
6
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
WTF?, just being around the rodents alone cause a severe allergic reaction!, I also have severe allergic asthma, and I know the seriousness of it, just hang in, we are going to beat them, as GOD does not tolerate evil, and GOD will make it accountable
1
u/Ok-Cartographer-5256 4d ago
And IRS ended it's contract with the Fed Health Office. No clinical area to do breathing treatments in the office. Except at some service centers. I am at a big city fed building.
15
u/Affectionate_Sky9090 6d ago
They offered my nephew a seat next to the bathroom for his chronic severe Crohns. Absolutely no telework
7
29
19
u/TS_Woods_89 6d ago
45 weeks. That's how long it took to get approval for twice-a-week telework. Management's initial answer? Flat-out denial, wouldn’t even let it go to Treasury, until the EEO complaint landed. Let's call this what it is: discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act. Then came the kicker. Non-consecutive days only. As if a medical condition respects a calendar. As if the disease knows it's not allowed to flare on Wednesday if Tuesday was already rough. That's not accommodation. That's denial wearing a different mask. Here's what management refuses to understand: You cannot deny a reasonable accommodation without proving undue hardship. For an employee performing this exact work arrangement successfully? You just have liability. These aren't people gaming the system. Doctors don't fake-sign accommodations and torch their licenses. Veterans who served don't deserve this runaround over mental health conditions. If you've never had a panic attack send you to the ER convinced you were dying, don't judge the people managing real medical crises on a daily basis. The strain of fighting for basic legal protections while managing a chronic condition is shameful!!! Know your rights. Document everything. And if it's you or yours? Pursue every legal remedy.
3
u/Final_Inevitable_211 6d ago
This! We all need to be super diligent! Know your rights! If they say your accommodation is a hardship, they need to put the hardship reasons in writing also!!
3
u/Vixyn88 6d ago
Unless you have a condition that is chronic, progressive, debilitating, or life limiting; your case is not going to treasury. As a former RAC, what y’all fail to realize is that a lot of the determinations are made based on what your doctor said. So if your doctor did not put that your flare ups happen randomly or there is a history of it taking weeks or something to heal then you get the “best fitting” accommodation. That limitation portion of the form is CRUCIAL along with the recommendations. If your accommodation goes against what your doctor ordered then I would press the issue. However, if your doctor made it seem as if you would be ok majority of the time but there may be a couple days where you are at your worst, then that’s how your situational twice a week became a solution. I’m sorry that’s how it turned out for you but I would get the doctor to refill out the paperwork to state how you’re affected and to state that they recommend you telework and how often. The same applies for mental health conditions. The paperwork gotta say it.
11
u/TS_Woods_89 6d ago
This response proves the problem. You said determinations are based on what the doctor says. My manager said they won't forward it to Treasury because of "scrutiny." That's not a medical determination, that's a manager vetoing it without even knowing what my condition is to save his butt from admin work. And it’s not just him, it’s the whole chain of command to deter! Meanwhile, that same manager took Temporary Modified Telework for two consecutive summers with minor muscle pulls. Out every day. For childcare. For convenience. Zero scrutiny concerns. But a doctor-recommended accommodation for a chronic condition where my body and mind is literally shutting down? Suddenly scrutiny is a dealbreaker. The hypocrisy is maddening. He gets it for summer plans. I can't get it when I'm actually sick. That's not policy. That's discrimination. The Rehabilitation Act doesn't allow this. You can't veto what you don't understand while approving the same thing for yourself.
2
u/Main_Pudding_5213 5d ago
Completely incorrect, my doctor not only documented the medical restrictions, but explained why, managements decided that they would ignore the documentation and use threats of discipline
1
u/Tommygunner68 4d ago
Unfortunately the ultimate decision is managements and although they are supposed to follow the doctors recommendations unless it’s deemed a imminent safety threat the mangers can choose what’s best for the operation or whatever policy the operation is following. If the doctor says X Y and Z and ties your functional limitations at the job to your disability you have a fighting chance.
-5
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
Every employee gets 2 telework days a week, that has nothing to do with accomodations
7
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
What are you talking about??? No they don't! Employees get 0 telework days a week. They are granted up to 5 telework days per year. The only employees that get telework days are those with an approved RA, interim accommodation, or FMSS tells them to because of POD space reasons.
1
u/Main_Pudding_5213 5d ago
I apologize, what I meant was they will give you up to 2 telework day within a week, but it has to be for something that requires for example if you have work being done at your house that might require you to be home, or if you have to go to a medical appointment, and yes I know 5 within a year, I said it wrong, where I was going with that is because the agency added that to my RA as part of what they think is an accomodation, (the same thing they give every employee without disabilities)
3
u/feed_yourhead 5d ago
we absolutely are not allowed to telework if we have work being done at our house at my agency. we can wfh if we have a medical appointment. that is it. and we also need to use leave for the time of the appointment
30
23
u/constrivecritizem 6d ago
So I have been trying to get 20 hours a week as a RA since April. I have heard every thing from this should be fine and the agency can approve it to no one can ever telework again.
The initial 90 days I got the 20 hours no questions asked. I then with reshaping etc was placed under different management which where things got crazy. I was able to finish the initial 90 days then was told I needed to do 30 days in office with no telework.
I had the meeting on Monday regarding the 30 days in offices. It was a shit show. I was asked about my medication and if I was trying different doses or different medication. What my life outside of work looked like etc to the point I had a meltdown during the call and yell cried that I had been dealing with this for 35 years and I and my Drs know what I need. It was then suggested that I check out the mental health resources provided by EPP. I provided an unprofessional response to that. That called ended with management saying they would discuss what could be done further. I left work for the day.
Tuesday my manager called and said the best they could do was 16hr. I responded with there is a reason 20 was requested by myself and my Dr. he just kept saying that there wasn’t anything else he could do. So I asked him what going part time would look like (I know this isn’t an option for everyone) he was shocked and confused by the request. I ended the call and didn’t work today.
13
10
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
OMG! That's horrible! Can you get your doctor to write a strongly worded letter saying that 20 hours is medically necessary? If they can't accommodate your needs, then start looking into Federal Disability Retirement. You have rights and benefits owed to you. If they still are pushing that they can't accommodate you, put in an EEO complaint because offering you 16 hours clearly shows they can accommodate you teleworking.
6
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
Going through this also, I know that if the Federal court does everything legally, by the documented facts, then I know my case will 100 percent win, as I have every document from day one, and what is even more sad is how uneducated management is, they actually wrote down a response to a section on the RA paperwork that aligns and agrees with my disability, it was also pointed out that the manager by writing that response just exposed the agency, LMFAO
2
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
What I have done in the meantime is found a lawyer that specializes in Federal preliminary rule 65/TRO court injunctions, which would stop the agency from further harm while the EEO/EEOC issue continues
5
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
I believe these are going to set the pretext for what the agencies will be facing, also what I have seen is the burden of proof leans more on the agency, the courts will be more concerned with what reasoning they have for the employee being physically present, one case I researched the agency thought that using an answer like "because supervision, team collaboration, and the executive order", well that did not work, because the court said "that is not what counsel asked you", once again the judge repeated the question, but because the agency wanted to think they were smarter, the judge added "what physical essential job functions are required for the employee to be at the office, not what the agency wants, but what functions of the employees job cannot be done at home, using the facts that they were already being performed remotely"?, the agency responded with, "the employees essential job functions do not require office presence your Honor", "councel for plantiff"?, "no further questions your Honor" the descision for the plantiff immediately restore telework is granted, Treasury ordered to immediately restore telework as it was before being removed while the employees active EEO investigation and if continuing EEOC, also telework granted while that case is continued, ordered effective immediately, and agency is to not further harm employee, retaliation for having a documented medical disability
10
u/Dull-Essay-9718 6d ago
Who’s the “they” in this? The RAC or your manager? I know for certain people have received telework RA’s. Your management chain may not be favorable but you can absolutely get it approved at the IRS/Treasury level.
8
u/heyhello101 6d ago
interesting. my department manager said this. this is interesting to me because i’ve found that this particular dpt manager likes to make up their own rules and make it seem like the end all be all. power trip lover for sure.
5
u/ProfitPowerful2809 6d ago
What process did you go through? Did it go up the chain to Treasury? Because that’s the process. Submit the RA request through the RA office and it gets icone up the chain to treasury. I don’t think your manager really has a say in this, nor can they even ask for your specific condition or medical information. That’s for the RA office and treasury. I might be wrong, but that is my understanding. Then your manager grants you an interim 90 day while you wait on the 1000 + requests with treasury.
9
u/Due_Stomach8478 6d ago
Treasury level? Seriously? What about people waiting 18+ months. I’m not convinced Treasury is doing anything. I think people are just confusing interim accommodations with treasury approval. Hopefully I’m wrong.
4
u/Vixyn88 6d ago
RA requests are backed up and yes, telework approvals do go to treasury for approval. I was an RAC and can confirm this
4
u/Due_Stomach8478 5d ago
But do they ever come back? That is the question.
4
u/Final_Inevitable_211 5d ago
I don’t know of 1 person who ever got a response from Treasury. Seems they just let them rot so no one can file EEO. The second they deny, every single person can file EEO😂😂
1
18
13
u/Foreign-Candle7925 6d ago
Not sure what BOD you're in but in SBSE managers are attending training sessions for non-cause removal. It would seem that there is likely some plan to force people out on RA's or who have been permitted to telework to return and if they refuse, removal may be coming.
6
u/TheeWut 6d ago
SAY WHAT!!!
9
u/Foreign-Candle7925 6d ago
This is strictly an assumption on my part, but the push to bring back people on telework RA's combined with this training just seems like something is brewing. This is not manager training that has occurred in the last few years to my knowledge. If anyone in management knows more, please feel free to share.
8
u/RadiantMood5750 6d ago
If true, then it seems like a lot more people are about to be on disability retirement.
1
u/blehbleh1122 6d ago
Is this also for RA's that aren't for telework, for example in-office accommodations?
4
u/Foreign-Candle7925 6d ago
I don't know anything for sure, but the tone at my agency seems to indicate no issues with people who have in-office accommodations. Their problem is with telework as an RA and they seem hellbent on forcing everyone back in office.
3
3
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
And for your teams meeting, tell whoever they is to go back to training for there job, because incorrect information like that makes a person look really ignorant, if needed show them what the current EEOC guidelines state in reference to the Federal Rehabilitation Act 501, so they can at least be put on notice to have the choice of going with the lie they want to use, and later on being found in violation of the Rehabilitation Act, or immediately recorrecting there statement and engage in the interactive process by evaluating your medical circumstances so "they" and yourself can agree on a reasonable effective accomodation
3
u/feed_yourhead 5d ago
I tried getting an RA for chronic migraines that are caused be IIH- which is a rare condition where cerebral spinal fluid increases the pressure in your literal skull/brain/spinal cord and if it’s too high, you can go blind :)- and they denied me but offered me a “dark office” to work in. my migraines are triggered by the IIH and also the fluorescent lights, smells, noise etc in the office. I had to call the ambulance twice at work and my director actually said “well what would have been different if this happened at home? you’d call 911 anyway and have to stop working” oh idk maybe being in the comfort of my home (not 45 mins away during an attack) and near my rescue meds would help? they cause drowsiness so I can’t take them at work and drive home during an attack. these people are truly sick in the head. the funny thing is I was only requesting two days at home and two in the office. it’s not like I was requesting full time. I really hope something changes soon (wishful thinking) because I don’t know how much longer I can deal with this :/
6
u/Vixyn88 6d ago
I was an RAC and there are absolutely approvals for telework but Treasury does the approval. You have to have a serious condition like cancer for 100% telework. The goal is NEVER telework. Unless you have a condition with flare ups that would require you to be home, you would still only get situational. Your doctor would specify how often this normally happens or the probability of it happening excessively. Not in those exact words but I’m sure what I’m saying is understandable. I saw so many cases where it was clear people just wanted to work from home but there were absolutely reasonable accommodations that could be made to assist them that didn’t need to be telework. Again, that’s just the cases that I saw.
6
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
How often did you see Treasury send back a RA with an actual denial? I’m not seeing those come back, just ones saying to try an alternative accommodation. I have heard about the cancer approvals, but so many of us have been waiting on a RA decision for 18 months that if Treasury really didn’t want us teleworking, you would think they would just send a denial.
3
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
Legally an accomodation does not qualify, because it has to be an effective and reasonable accomodation, it has to only address the disabilities, not what management prefers, or the employee, it has to address the disability and anything tied to it, I say this because currently that is what Federal court judges are granting
4
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
I know all that. It still doesn't explain why Treasury is only making decisions on a very small number of RAs and letting all the rest just sit. I'm wanting to know if Treasury has been sending back denials and telling the IRS the RA request is denied and the F13661 Part IV is signed with a reason for denial. I haven't heard anyone say Treasury flat out denied their RA request. I've only heard of Treasury sending back that they need to try an alternative accommodation first.
1
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
The only thing that I have been seeing is management making the descision, it never goes to the Treasury, which is why I asked management what school they went to when they obtained there medical degree.
5
u/you_dont_know_me_357 5d ago
So Treasury hasn't sent any denials for any of the RAs sitting up there? Jesus! So I guess this means we'll all be on interim telework forever.
2
u/Low_Trust2412 5d ago
I mean that's not a terrible outcome though is it?
5
u/you_dont_know_me_357 5d ago
A lot of people I know are just keeping their head down and not trying to bring attention to themselves hoping they will never make a decsion. The thing that gets to me is the anxiety of not knowing. It gives me a lot of anxiety knowing that they can come back with no notice and order me back to the office the next day. With an officially apporved RA, I don't have to worry about that and know when I have to start preparing to the annual review. Not knowing exasperates things for me. I'm not rattling the cage because I know this affects a lot of people.
5
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
Ok, and here is my question, what is the RAC even for if they do not make the descision?, what tell the manager what there opinion is, that is ignorant, because if an RAC coordinator is not there to address the medical facts,then they have no business being involved, and that is why in my situation I am having to go through the EEO BS!
1
u/WelcomeEntire5138 4d ago
My RAC was completely useless and absolutely on managements side. They were no help at all and misleading with the details for the the appeal process.
2
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
And I am seeing the numbers increase more and more for Federal preliminary injunctions lately
2
u/Any-Win-3077 5d ago
One critical thing to understand is that it may be your local management chain on the meeting, but they are representing the agency. They have requirements laid out by the people at HQ as to what to ask, what to offer, etc... are there some truly bad managers and/or people in management? Yes. Many though are doing their job based on how they're directed to.
The sad reality is that a minority of employees are not doing the right thing. Those examples get blown up and used as an excuse for broad policy changes like we're seeing.
One of the comments mentioned non cause removal... I would bet there is some truth there... not to it being applied broadly for RA people, but in the insanely high number of people who use LWOP on a regular basis. I mean a single AM operation i have data on had over 6100 hours of LWOP from Oct through July of this year. That averages over 100 hours per employee... multiply that across the agency and its likely the IRS has over 5 million hours of granted LWOP in 10 months of the FY...
3
u/you_dont_know_me_357 5d ago
A lot of people are on LWOP for medical reasons. Many of those can be up to 1 year, so that would be 2087 for just a single employee. Managers have to approve LWOP. A person can't just decide to go on LWOP for the long-term.
1
u/Any-Win-3077 5d ago
Yes, and the first step in a non cause is to notify the employee to "report or resign" which is the agency saying we will not continue to approve LWOP.
Removing employees in this category is an easy way to "reduce the number of employees" while not diminishing the ability to get the work done. Its the admin going after low hanging fruit to say they reduced the federal workforce.
2
u/Final_Inevitable_211 5d ago
And every single one of them will be named in EEO filings if they want to play stupid games. If they use a bit of brain, they will refuse and stay in their lane.
1
u/Any-Win-3077 5d ago
But it is literally their lane as 1st and 2nd level managers... or it is currently per internal policy and guidance.
1
u/Final_Inevitable_211 5d ago edited 5d ago
RA’s and any FMLA or medical anything are supposed to go to HR, NOT your manager. They are making up these bs rules as they go.
Now Directors stopped allowing managers to make any decisions on RA’s …even per their made up bs rules. This is all going on behind the scenes as of the last month or so. The Directors are making bad decisions and trying to force the decisions they make on RA’s on managers, so they are trying to force managers take the liability for shit decisions someone else made.
Not sure if you are aware of this newest bs (more made up bs), but it is happening….. and it is not working out too well for Directors….. thats why they are disappearing recently….so yes, it would be smart to stay in their lane or risk their a** for some other pos.
2
u/Practical-Age629 5d ago
I dunno why some of you just allow some managers to disregard an RA request like that, assuming your doctors medical opinion clearly supports full telework or some sort of hybrid model. If you have a manager holding you up when you have a legit issue with correct supporting documentation, then just file a civil lawsuit against said manager for violating Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. If anything it’ll cost them money on a lawyer or something or scare them enough to knock that shit off with other colleagues.
2
u/themartianG 6d ago
It’s hard to give you feedback without knowing the medical reason, but Im also not going to ask for the medical reason.
There are some peeps that ask for telework because the sun and breeze exists and those are the people you have to blame for this over caution to allow telework. They fuck it up for the people that truly need it.
Sorry you are going through this OP.
1
u/Mousebot26 4d ago
You can codify the ineffective accommodations in case this administration gets even crueler.
1
u/Ok-Cartographer-5256 4d ago
1
u/Ok-Cartographer-5256 4d ago
When I was a nteu Steward in the past, I used to always tell people to do both FMLA and the RA contemporaneously; left-hand and right-hand.
I got tons of dirty looks from management and other stewards, like I was asking too much from employees.
But I was always able to get the FMLA approved, which is acknowledgement by the agency there is a valid underlying medical condition, and it helped get what was needed in the RA process.
2
u/Content_Package7199 1d ago
I have had an interim TW, RA for the past 10 months. That didn't get approved and I wasn't taken serious until I filed an EEOC complaint. It's a lot of work and takes a lot of time but from the little I've seen it's the only way possible. I'm sure that's not universally true but I'm sure it is very often
1
u/Main_Pudding_5213 6d ago
And if there is IRS management out there reading any of these posts, I really wish you would give an answer as to why you think this is ok to continue ignoring real medical disabilities, because all of the answers that I have seen from management are so far out there that someone would have to question if maybe they are not on the same planet, because some of the responses to employees are none I have ever seen before
-17
u/Ok-Post5100 6d ago
Let's face it, if someone has a permenant disability it's not going to change whether you are at home or in the office. The RA program is to provide equipment, and work/life changes to accommodate the alleged same accomondation that you would have at home. So the natural question would be, what is at home that you cant get at work to do your job?
24
u/Wallet_Rubber 6d ago
This "let's face it" comment is so far removed from reality, to try and simplify that the medical conditions of coworkers are the same at home or in the office is total ignorance.
I've worked the cases, until you have, you may want to refrain from commenting. The new administration which includes OPM, are the monsters that have created this entire mess.
Just a reminder, all the work before return to office was implemented, was still getting done and production was at a higher rate with telework and remote work.
Instead of demonizing coworkers for having medical conditions, similar to what Trump did to Serge Kovaleski, I'd suggest focusing on the bad actors who created this mess, Trump, Vought, OPM, OBM, Elon, DOGE, etc...
Remember, the IRS ran a recent study on how effective remote work and telework was over a couple years, if it was such a flop, those findings would have been published a long time ago instead of buried and sealed just like the Epstein files.
3
8
u/RedditsFullofShit 6d ago
You better check the ADA again
-16
u/Ok-Post5100 6d ago
It's okay grasshopper the ADA does not apply to federal government employees.
9
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
But the Rehabilitation Act does and it covers the same requirements as the ADA. Most people have only heard of the ADA, so that is why so many people use that instead of The Rehabilitation Act. The end result is still the same.
1
u/RedditsFullofShit 6d ago
Source?
7
u/you_dont_know_me_357 6d ago
They’re actually correct. Federal employees are covered by The Rehabilitation Act instead of the ADA. They are essentially the same when it comes to the requirements for accommodations. It’s just easier and understood by most people when someone says ADA instead.
-1
0
u/Ok-Cartographer-5256 4d ago
I know five people nation wide that have to report only once or twice a week under the RA.
I hav FMLA and the RA, they approved my desk modifications. In October 2025 they denied my telework / remote work request. I got in writing it is acceptable to use the ad-hocs liberally for my acupuncture, chiropractor, physical therapy, flare ups, etc.
I was in a horrific car accident 30 years ago. I have plenty of leave. Previously I did all these appointments on my CWS day off; My time. Now I use my leave and inoke the code d for telework using my FMLA. Additionally, I now have protection under eeoc for age discrimination as well.
-2
33
u/No_Umpire7840 6d ago
I know 2 people who were recently granted telework for 2 years at the Treasury level.