Tag Archives: ada

Can Employers Require Employees to Get the COVID-19 Vaccine?

Photo by RF._.studio on Pexels.com

Happy New Year! 

Moving on from 2020 does not mean we have moved on from the scourge that is COVID-19.  However, the COVID vaccine is finally here! Though distribution has been slow, employers are planning ahead and wondering if they can require employees to get a vaccine as a condition to returning to work.  The short answer is yes, but there are some important factors to take into consideration to avoid potential risks, such as compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), and other state and federal employment laws.

According to newly published EEOC guidance, employers, in general, can require employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and have determined that administration of a vaccine is not a medical examination under the ADA. “If a vaccine is administered to an employee by an employer for protection against contracting COVID-19, the employer is not seeking information about an individual’s impairments or current health status and, therefore, it is not a medical examination.” However, employers should be careful with any pre-vaccination questions as those could be subject to ADA laws. Employers need to make sure that these questions are job-related and consistent with business necessity.

Of course, there are always exceptions to the general rule.  Employees who have medical concerns related to a disability or sincerely held religious beliefs that preclude them from being vaccinated may be exempted from the vaccination requirement. In these scenarios, a reasonable accommodation that does not pose an undue hardship to the employer’s business may be required, such as allowing the employee to work from home, requiring the employee wear protective equipment at all times, or providing a separate space for the employee to work.

Where an accommodation is not possible or cannot substantially reduce the risk of infection to others, the employer must be able to demonstrate that the unvaccinated employee poses a “direct threat” to the safety and health of other individuals at the workplace. The following factors should be evaluated in determining if a direct threat at the workplace exists:

  • the duration of the risk
  • the nature and severity of the potential harm
  • the likelihood that the potential harm will occur
  • the imminence of the potential harm 

If there are no reasonable accommodations available and the employer finds that the employee does pose a direct threat to others, the employee may be prohibited from physically entering the workplace, but this does not mean the employer can terminate the worker without liability. Employers will need to determine if any other rights apply under other federal, state or local laws.

Finally, employers are not shielded from liability if an employee suffers adverse effects from a mandated vaccine administered by the employer or a third party with whom the employer has contracted. Therefore, the best option for employers is to encourage employees to take the vaccine voluntarily rather than mandating it. Employers can choose to give incentives to those employees that decide to get the vaccine to promote voluntary compliance.

Always best to contact legal counsel if you have any further questions.

Ellen M. Leibovitch

Board Certified Labor & Employment Lawyer


2101 N.W. Corporate Blvd., Suite 410

Boca Raton, Florida 33431

Main: 561-361-6566
Direct: 561-948-2479

[Bio] [V-card] [Directions]



Leave a comment

Filed under labor and employment law

Website ADA Compliance – The Next Wave of Litigation?


For over 25 years, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has required business owners offering public accommodations reassess accessibility to the disabled.  Usually, being named as a defendant in a federal lawsuit challenging parking spaces, restroom sizes and furnishings, counter heights and other similar structural barriers forces business owners to comply with the ADA.  The fact is that most businesses are susceptible to these lawsuits given the rise of the so-called “drive by” phenomenon, where the same plaintiff, with the assistance of the same attorney, files multiple lawsuits against all businesses in the same shopping center, same geographic care or same industry.

Enter the 21st century, and we are seeing a new frontier for legal challenges under the ADA: websites.  Many business owners fail to realize that specific accessibility standards apply to websites as well, which is why attorneys representing sight and hearing-impaired and other physically disabled users are suing businesses whose websites fail to comply with the current web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG).  Consequently, businesses whose websites may not be accessible to the disabled would be smart to consider remediation before getting sued.

According to Jeremy Horelick, Vice President of ADA Site Compliance:

The cost of proper remediation can range from tens of thousands of dollars to the high-six-figures. Big companies like Target, which spent nearly $10 million in restitution and legal fees in a landmark case brought by the National Federation of the Blind, can bear that financial hit. But small and mid-market businesses often cannot. For them, getting ahead of the compliance curve is a must, especially now that the DOJ has withdrawn its long-awaited regulations on the matter. The lack of clarity means a near-certain uptick in the pace of forthcoming cases.

One recent decision in the Southern District of Florida is Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. In that case, the plaintiff argued that defendant’s website was inaccessible to the visually impaired.  Title  III of the ADA prohibits the owner of a place of public accommodation from discriminating “on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation . . . .” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).  The court stated that when a website is heavily integrated with physical store locations, the website is a service of a public accommodation and covered by the ADA.  As a result, the court found that the defendant’s website was not accessible to visually impaired individuals who must use screen readers to view the website and granted an injunction to ensure the website was in compliance with the ADA.

Federal lawsuits are costly and time-consuming, which is why smart business owners should act proactively: remediation before litigation.  Horelick suggests hiring a qualified third-party auditor to scan your site and determine the scope of work to be done as this will establish an objective baseline.  Also, avoid free online diagnostic tools, which only catch 20-30% of known failures at best. Businesses that rely solely on free tools may get a false sense of compliance with the WCAG.

For any questions about the ADA and this new frontier of ADA compliance, please contact Board Certified Labor and Employment Partner Ellen Leibovitch.


1801 N. Military Trail, Suite 160

Boca Raton, Florida 33431

Main: (561) 361-6566

Fax: (561) 361-6466

Email: EML@assoulineberlowe.com


Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment Law, International Dispute Resolution, Bankruptcy, Commercial Litigation, Real Estate, and Corporate Law

Miami • Ft. Lauderdale • Boca Raton

Leave a comment

Filed under Labor & Employment, labor and employment law