Royal

Accommodations for Employees with Long COVID

March 30, 2023

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Long COVID can be considered a disability. The Job Accommodation Network (JAN) has offered guidance as to what on-the-job accommodations an employer can offer to workers affected by Long COVID.


Long COVID symptoms you experience may be any or all of the following (According to the Job Accommodation Network):

  • Shortness of breath;
  • Extreme fatigue;
  • Brain fog;
  • Insomnia;
  • Tachycardia;
  • Joint pain;
  • Body aches;
  • Headaches


A series of suggestions as to how to help accommodate employees who are sufferers of Long COVID include:

  • Restructuring the job;
  • Allowing rest breaks;
  • Providing a quiet workspace;
  • Flexible schedules;
  • Telework;
  • Leave for treatment.


JAN has recommended that employers spend more time assessing what accommodations may be practicable within their work environment rather than assessing whether the employee has Long COVID. This is because the diagnosis of Long COVID seemingly takes time. Also, while receiving treatment for various symptoms of the disorder, an employee may still not yet be formally diagnosed. Additionally, an employee is not required to have a formal diagnosis in order to request accommodation(s). Instead, an employee only needs a healthcare provider to document that the employee possesses an impairment that affects their daily activities, in order to request accommodations.


Moreover, accommodations should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Employers should avoid the implementation of a one-size-fits-all solution for employees suffering from Long COVID.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Massachusetts’ Superior Court Judge Rules Recording in Workplace Admissible

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

After the DEI Executive Order

February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: