This one’s for every business who’s ever said to a sick or injured worker, “We can’t bring you back until you’re 100%.”
The EEOC’s response was clear: “Policies that require an employee to be 100% before returning to work are unlawful. Employers must assess whether an employee can perform the job with or without a reasonable accommodation.”
Here’s why “100% healed” policies are legal landmines.
1. The ADA’s Reasonable Accommodation Requirement
The ADA employers to reasonably accommodate employees with disabilities — including those coming back from medical leave — so they can perform their essential job functions.
That might mean light duty, modified schedules, assistive devices, or temporary reassignment. What it can’t mean is an all-or-nothing rule that says, “Come back only when you’re completely healthy.”
Because that rule eliminates the individualized assessment the ADA demands, it screens out workers who could do the job with a bit of flexibility.
The ADA also requires employers to engage in an interactive process — a dialogue with the employee to figure out what accommodation might allow them to return.
It’s not one-size-fits-all. It’s a back-and-forth conversation that explores what the employee can do, what they can’t, and what reasonable steps the employer can take to bridge that gap.
When an employer demands a “full-duty” release, it cuts off that process before it even begins. You’re telling the employee: “We’re not interested in talking about accommodations; we only take perfect.” That’s not compliance — that’s discrimination.
Instead, train your managers and HR team to ask the right question: “What can this employee do, and what can we reasonably do to help them succeed?” That’s the ADA-compliant — and human — approach.
Because at the end of the day, the only thing your policies should be 100% about is compliance.
