A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

People with disabilities have rights in the workplace

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
For many years in our country, people with disabilities have struggled in the workplace. If you had a physical, mental or psychological problem that prevented you from doing your job, you could be fired and would need to find a different job, if you could. But times have changed. There is an expectation in our country now that employers provide their workers with reasonable accommodations if they have disabilities. If you have been discriminated against in the workplace because of your disability, you need to know your rights and understand how the law protects your right to work. Reasonable Accommodations One of the most important things to understand is the notion of “reasonable accommodations” and how it plays out in the workplace. The problem is that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which brings out the “reasonable accommodations” standard, does not make it clear exactly what reasonable accommodations are. On the surface level, employers need to make efforts to accommodate their employees with disabilities, but it is not clear to what degree employers need to make these efforts. In most disability discrimination claims, the primary argument revolves around what level of accommodation can a specific employer be expected to make. Employers are generally good, and experienced, at showing that particular accommodations would be an unreasonable hardship. Winning these cases for employees requires significant experience and skill of an attorney. When your career and your rights are at stake, make sure you get the help you need to win your case.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.