In this 2017 case study, Johns Hopkins Hospital had been issued a tough blow: In Searls v. Johns Hopkins Hospital, a deaf nurse accepted a job offer from the hospital, and then informed them that she would need an American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter in order to perform her job functions. Johns Hopkins rescinded the offer, stating that there was no room within the department’s budget to make such an accommodation. Therefore, the hospital reasoned, they were under no obligation to provide the interpreter because the cost for the interpreter constituted an “undue hardship” and therefore was not required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The nurse filed a discrimination suit, and the court found against Johns Hopkins, finding that the cost of hiring an interpreter did not, in fact, constitute an “undue hardship.”

Important to note is that this case does not stand for the holding that excessive cost can never qualify as an undue hardship for accommodation purposes. The takeaway is that in order for an employee’s accommodation request to constitute an undue hardship, the employer needs to be able to show the accommodation would have a significant negative effect on business operations. This would include negatively impacting customer service or unfairly creating more work for other employees. Johns Hopkins did not provide this information. In addition, the court took issue with the fact that the hospital only considered the budget for a single department when determining whether the accommodation was feasible, as opposed to looking at the hospital’s entire operating budget.

The bottom line is that while cost may be a factor when determining whether an accommodation is feasible, you must be prepared to show that a cost is more than just “high” - it would need to have a measurable impact upon your business. Before making any decisions related to disability accommodations, you should always consult an attorney to ensure that your response is lawful.