Gerard v. 1199 National Benefit Funds

Background

The court had dismissed Gerard’s original complaint on September 13, 2024. Gerard, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a proposed First Amended Complaint and an accompanying letter. The court treated the letter as a motion to amend and, alternatively, as a motion asking the court to reconsider the earlier dismissal.

Gerard alleged that the Fund announced a COVID-19 vaccination requirement for employees. After he contracted COVID-19 on August 19, 2021, his doctors advised him to wait 90 days before receiving a vaccine. He told the Fund’s human-resources department that he needed additional time and described continuing symptoms, including fatigue, shortness of breath, irregular heartbeat, dizziness, nausea, and high blood pressure. The Fund placed him on leave beginning October 5, 2021. Gerard was vaccinated on November 19, 2021. On December 1, the Fund told him that his employment had ended but offered to reinstate him if he provided proof of vaccination by December 3.

Reasonable-accommodation claims

A reasonable-accommodation claim requires allegations that the employee has a disability, the employer knew about it, the employee could perform the job’s essential functions with an accommodation, and the employer refused to provide the accommodation. The court concluded that Gerard’s allegations were sufficient at this stage to allege a disability based on serious continuing symptoms associated with what is now sometimes called Long COVID. The Fund had not contested that issue in its motion papers.

The court also concluded that Gerard plausibly alleged that the Fund knew about his condition and did not adequately engage in the required interactive process. The interactive process is a good-faith exchange in which an employer and employee assess the disability and possible accommodations. The court stated that an employer may request adequate medical documentation, but it must also act proactively when the circumstances call for further discussion. The court found that Gerard plausibly alleged that the Fund rejected his request without sufficiently investigating his condition or working with him to identify a possible accommodation.

The court further concluded that Gerard adequately alleged that he could perform his job while waiting to be vaccinated, because he had worked remotely for more than a year and nothing before the court showed that he could not continue doing so. The court held that the reasonable-accommodation claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law survive for the period from October 5, 2021, through December 1, 2021. Claims based on events after December 1, 2021, remain dismissed because the Fund had offered to reinstate Gerard if he provided proof of vaccination.

Other claims and defendants

The court held that Gerard’s claim under the New York City Human Rights Law for failure to engage in a required cooperative dialogue also survives for the October 5 to December 1 period. Claims based on later events remain dismissed.

The court left dismissed Gerard’s other claims against the Fund, including claims alleging employment discrimination through an adverse action, claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act, and claims under the New York Permanent Sick Leave Law. The court also held that Gerard’s remaining claims against the individual defendants, Kevin Hurley and Richard Whitter, fail because the Americans with Disabilities Act does not impose individual liability. The court stated that it knew of no authority allowing individual liability for the parallel state and city accommodation claims or for the city cooperative-dialogue claim.

Ruling and next steps

Judge Dale E. Ho granted Gerard’s motion to amend and granted in part and denied in part his motion for reconsideration. The court vacated the portions of the earlier dismissal order concerning the reasonable-accommodation and cooperative-dialogue claims against the Fund for October 5 through December 1, 2021. All other claims remain dismissed. The First Amended Complaint is now the operative complaint. The parties were directed to meet and confer within 14 days, and the defendants were directed to submit a status letter by December 1, 2025 addressing next steps, possible mediation, and a proposed case-management plan.