(a) A recipient shall make reasonable accommodation to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified handicapped applicant, employee or participant unless the recipient can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of its program or activity.
(b) In determining pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section whether an accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of a recipient's program or activity, factors to be considered include;
(1) The overall size of the recipient's program or activity with respect to number of employees, number of participants, number and type of facilities, and size of budget;
(2) The type of the recipient's operation, including the composition and structure of the recipient's workforce, and duration and type of training; and
(3) The nature and cost of the accommodation needed.
(c) A recipient may not deny any employment or training opportunity to a qualified handicapped employee, applicant or participant if the basis for the denial is the need to make reasonable accommodation to the physical or mental limitations of the employee, applicant or participant.
(d) Nothing in this paragraph shall relieve a recipient of its obligation to make its program or activity accessible as required in subpart C of this part, or to provide auxiliary aids, as required by § 32.4(b)(7).
[45 FR 66709, Oct. 7, 1980, as amended at 68 FR 51368, Aug. 26, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1997–2014 · leading case:
Lucenti v. Potter, 432 F. Supp. 2d 347 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
Lucenti v. Potter, 432 F. Supp. 2d 347 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
“An “undue hardship” is defined at 29 C.F.R. § 32.13 . See also 29 C.F.R. § 1630.”
Onishea v. Hopper, 171 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 1999).
· cites it 3× “511 (a) (Department of Justice); 29 C.F.R. § 32.13 (Department of Labor). The applicability of these regulations as a general rule follows federal funding from an agency.”
Reyazuddin v. Montgomery Cnty., 7 F. Supp. 3d 526 (D. Maryland 2014).
“” She points to 29 C.F.R. § 32.13 (c), which states that “[a] recipient [of federal funding] may not deny any employment or training opportunity to a qualified handicapped employee .”
Onishea v. Hopper, 126 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 1997).
· cites it 4× “511 (a) (Department of Justice); 29 C.F.R. § 32.13 (Department of Labor). The applicability of these regulations as a general rule follows federal funding from an agency.”
Onishea v. Hopper, 126 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 1997).
· cites it 4× “511 (a) (Department of Justice); 29 C.F.R. § 32.13 (Department of Labor). The applicability of these regulations as a general rule follows federal funding from an agency.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.