skip to main content

Sid Steinberg Examines an ADA Case That Explores Whether On-Site Attendance is Crucial to Performing Job Duties for The Legal Intelligencer

In his February 2016 Employment Law Column for The Legal Intelligencer, Employment Chair Sidney R. Steinberg examined the case Fischer v. Pepper Hamilton involving in which the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found that regular on-site attendance may not be essential for a project attorney hired by a law firm. 

In analyzing the case, Mr. Steinberg notes: 

"The court’s decision calls into question whether regular and predictable attendance is in fact an essential function for several classes of employees who have the ability to telecommute and perform their jobs remotely. what is clear from the court’s decision is that the determination of whether regular and predictable attendance is an essential job function is a fact-intensive inquiry that will turn on the specific requirements and details of an individual’s position."