Lite duty as a requested accommodation by physician

Lite duty as a requested accommodation by physician

Lite duty is handled through the work comp department, or is it a request for accommodation handled by EEOC department?

On May 5, 2003, complainant also provided the agency with

a medical document stating that his doctor did not know when complainant

would have a full recovery and placing additional restrictions on

complainant that included: “no environment that includes noise from

alarms, machinery, people, distractions, time pressure, disruptive and

angry passengers, and the requirement to identify and locate potentially

life threatening devices and devices intended on creating massive

destruction.”

The agency indicated that management initially provided complainant with

reasonable accommodations in accordance with his work restrictions.

He was allowed light duty work at the TSA checkpoints.  Furthermore,

on March 17, 2003, upon his doctor’s request, management arranged a

modified light duty for complainant at its Administrative Office to do

tasks such as shredding documents, sorting surrendered items, reviewing

the Standard Operating Procedures, printing and filing polities and

procedures, and assisting with lost and found items.  However, when

management received the May 5, 2003 medical documentation, they could

not accommodate complainant’s restrictions any longer.

Complainant claimed that he was able to sit at the exit station, guard

the break room, perform clerical duties, and segregate prohibited items.

He admitted that he could not perform his regular duties as a TSS with

accommodations.  The agency stated that the duties and responsibilities

of a TSS included pre-board screening of persons and their baggage and

implementing security screening procedures.  The Commission finds that

complainant has failed to show that he was a “qualified” individual

in that he could perform the essential functions of the TSS position

with or without a reasonable accommodation.  See 29 C.F.R. §1630.2(m).

Complainant has not shown, and the record does not indicate, that there

was any vacant funded position that met his medical restrictions.

Eddie J. Lujan,

Complainant,

v.

Michael Chertoff,

Secretary,

Department of Homeland Security,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01200615711

Agency No. HS 05-0195