Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/796925.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 796925.pdf
Full Text
1,755 charsAHS did not initially provide any response to Pope’s notice of her memory troubles and did not do anything to assist her with the telephone system. Weeks later, a supervisor began calling Pope to remind her to use the telephone system at the beginning and end of her shifts, but this only happened a few times. In June 2015, a month after she had raised her medical issues with AHS, Pope filed a complaint with the Seattle Office of Civil Rights (SOCR) alleging that AHS did not accommodate her disability. Subsequently, the Seattle Office of Labor Standards (SOLS) filed a minimum wage and administrative wage theft charge against AHS. AHS learned of the accommodation complaint and the administrative wage theft charge in early July 2015. Shortly after learning of Pope’s complaints, AHS wrote to Pope’s medical provider demanding that she provide an assessment of whether Pope was capable of performing the duties of a care provider and complaining that Pope was unable to accurately use the telephone clock in system and was forgetful. Pope’s medical provider responded by informing AHS that she was not qualified to make such a vocational assessment. AHS did not engage in any further efforts to ascertain whether Pope was 3 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 79692-5-I/4 medically fit for work. The following week, AHS began assisting Pope with clocking in using the telephone system by instructing her to set reminder alarms on her own telephone and by calling her, although they did not do so every time Pope was required to clock in or out. Then, only one week later, AHS informed Pope that her client had complained that Pope had not come to work as scheduled on July 16 and