Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Jonathan Stuckel and Associate Shawn McBrearty obtained a favorable outcome for a senior living community operator, with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) issuing a no probable cause determination and closing the matter. The PHRC concluded there was insufficient evidence to support the complainant’s allegations of discrimination or retaliation.
The complainant, a caregiver, alleged disability discrimination and retaliation, claiming she was disciplined, denied reasonable accommodation, removed from duties, and ultimately discharged after disclosing a history of cancer and arm-related limitations. She asserted that the respondent failed to accommodate lifting restrictions, disciplined her for time off related to medical appointments, and retaliated by removing her from the schedule and terminating her employment.
GRSM’s defense emphasized legitimate, well-documented, non-discriminatory reasons for the employment actions, including attendance issues, adherence to established workplace policies, and the essential physical requirements of the caregiver role. The respondent’s position detailed multiple absences and instances of tardiness that resulted in progressive discipline, including a final warning. GRSM also explained that the caregiver position required regular lifting and resident transfers, functions incompatible with a five-pound lifting restriction, and that an office-based role referenced by the complainant had been filled before any restriction request was made.
Following its investigation, the PHRC determined the evidence did not support the claims. The agency found no showing of protected activity preceding the discipline and no reasonable accommodation that would have enabled the complainant to perform the essential functions of the caregiver position. The investigator also noted the timing of the discipline, the job’s lifting requirements, the unavailability of the desk role at the relevant time, and the complainant’s failure to provide additional supporting evidence despite being afforded the opportunity.
The PHRC’s determination closed the administrative matter in favor of GRSM’s client. This result underscores GRSM’s ability to defend employers through thorough factual development, strategic advocacy, and clear presentation of legitimate, non-retaliatory business reasons for employment decisions.
