January 13, 2025 | JacobiJournal.com — A California federal court recently granted Costco Wholesale Corp. summary judgment, dismissing a claim of wrongful termination and Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) violation filed by an injured worker. The court determined that Costco had met its obligation to accommodate the worker’s disability.
Background of the Case
Margarita Zamora, a long-time Costco employee, filed a lawsuit after a shoulder injury prevented her from lifting, pulling, or pushing more than 10 pounds. This injury made it impossible for her to return to her original job as a stocker.
Zamora suggested she could perform other tasks, like cleaning, if the company modified her role. However, the court ruled that FEHA does not require employers to create light-duty positions for workers unable to do essential job functions. Costco was not obligated to offer her a modified position with non-essential tasks, according to the court.
Court’s Ruling
Violation Claim Against Costco: The court found that Costco made reasonable efforts to accommodate Zamora. Despite trying to find alternative roles for her, the company could not offer a position that met her medical restrictions. In January 2021, Costco terminated her employment.
The court concluded, “Costco reasonably accommodated Zamora by offering vacant positions that aligned with her medical limitations.” The court emphasized that Costco had no duty to create a new position with tasks outside of Zamora’s restrictions.
Legal Precedents and Implications
This case reinforces that employers must engage in good-faith efforts to accommodate employees with disabilities. However, employers are not required to create modified roles or change essential job functions. They must demonstrate reasonable attempts to adjust existing roles to fit the employee’s medical needs.
For detailed coverage, read the original article from WorkCompCentral.
FAQs: Costco FEHA Termination Case
What was the Costco FEHA termination case about?
The case involved a Costco employee who claimed the company failed to accommodate her shoulder injury, leading to her termination.
How did the court rule in the Costco FEHA termination case?
The court dismissed the claim, finding Costco had reasonably accommodated the worker by offering alternative positions within her restrictions.
Does FEHA require employers to create new roles for injured employees?
No, the court clarified that FEHA requires reasonable accommodation but does not obligate employers to create modified or light-duty positions.
What does the termination case mean for employers?
It reinforces that employers must show good-faith efforts to accommodate workers but are not required to alter essential job functions or invent new roles.
Stay ahead in workplace and employment law. Subscribe to JacobiJournal.com for expert insights on FEHA cases, employee rights, and federal court rulings.