Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

EEOC Provides Updated Guidance Regarding Employer COVID-19 Vaccine Policies

Client Alert

On May 28, 2021, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission updated its guidance regarding employer COVID-19 vaccination policies. The new guidance provides much-needed clarification of expectations for employers seeking to promote workplace safety and prevent the spread of COVID-19, including discussion of mandatory vaccination policies, voluntary vaccination incentives, and accommodation of employees based on disability or sincerely held religious beliefs. The full text of the update is found in Section K of the EEOC’s COVID Q&A document. You can also learn more about these and other developments from BMD's Bryan Meek and Monica Andress through the Employment Law After Hours YouTube channel, available here.

Can employers require employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

Yes, the EEOC guidance explains that federal laws do not prevent an employer from requiring employees who are physically in the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19.

Must employers make any exceptions to a mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy?

Yes, in certain cases, employees may be entitled to reasonable accommodation due to a disability or a sincerely held religious belief, unless the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on the employer.

If an employee refuses to get the COVID-19 vaccine based on a disability, the employer should engage in an interactive process to determine if accommodation is appropriate. If the employee has a qualifying disability that prevents vaccination, the employer should evaluate whether the unvaccinated employee is a direct threat to the safety of the workplace. This is a case-by-case determination that should consider such factors as the level of community spread of COVID-19 at that time, whether the employee works alone or in close proximity to others, frequency and duration of interactions with others, the extent of vaccination or mask-wearing in the workplace, and space available for social distancing.

If the unvaccinated employee poses a direct safety threat, the employer should then consider whether a reasonable accommodation would eliminate the threat. Accommodations could include permitting the unvaccinated employee to wear a face mask, social distance from coworkers and others, work a modified shift, get periodic tests for COVID-19, telework, or accept a reassignment to a different position that alleviates the risk. If reasonable accommodation will not eliminate the direct safety threat, or it otherwise imposes an undue hardship based on cost or other factors, the employer would not need to provide an accommodation to the employee. 

Can employers provide incentives that encourage employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

Yes, employers may offer incentives, including monetary incentives, to encourage employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Note that if the vaccine is administered directly by the employer or its agent, the incentive must not be "so substantial as to be coercive." This limitation does not apply if the employee gets the vaccine on their own from a third party.

Can employers request documentation of vaccination from employees in connection with an incentive program?

Yes, an employer can make voluntary vaccination incentives contingent on the employee providing documentation verifying that they received the COVID-19 vaccine.
 

What other requirements should employers keep in mind related to COVID-19 vaccination policies?

  • Any documentation or information regarding an employee's vaccination, like any other medical information, must be kept confidential and stored separately from the employee’s personnel files.
  • Employer vaccine policies must comply with federal nondiscrimination laws, and such policies should not treat groups of employees differently based on protected categories, including race, national origin, color, sex, religion, age, or disability.
  • If an employee is fully vaccinated and still requests an accommodation because of risks related to COVID-19 (e.g., due to being immunocompromised), the employer should treat it like any other accommodation request, engage in the interactive process, and explore potential reasonable accommodations.

The BMD Employment and Labor Law Practice Group will keep you updated as further developments arise, and we are available to assist if you have questions regarding COVID-19 employment policies and practices.

For more information, contact Labor and Employment Attorney Russell Rendall at rtrendall@bmdllc.com or (216) 658-2205.


Corporate Transparency Act: Business Owners Must Act Now

The Corporate Transparency Act requires all reporting companies to file their Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) report by year-end to avoid penalties. Companies formed before January 1, 2024, have less than six months to comply. Learn more in a client alert by BMD Member Blake Gerney.

New Medicare Billing Rules: What MFTs, MHCs, and IOP Providers Need to Know

Starting January 1, 2024, Medicare began covering services provided to Medicare beneficiaries by marriage and family therapists, mental health counselors, and Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) services. With this change, Medicare has become the primary payer for these services.

Chevron Doctrine No More: What the Supreme Court’s Ruling Means for Agency Authority

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court invalidated the Chevron doctrine, nearly 40 years after it first took effect.

Ohio Board of Pharmacy Update: Key Regulatory Changes and Proposals You Need to Know

The Ohio Board of Pharmacy (BOP) has rescinded certain OAC rules (OAC 4729:5-18-01 through 4729:5-18-06), removing regulations on office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) clinics. The rescissions took effect on June 3, 2024. The BOP also published a new rule, OAC 4729:8-5-01, which sets explicit reporting guidelines for licensed dispensaries and became effective on June 7, 2024.

LGBTQIA+ Patients and Discrimination in Healthcare

In early April, the Kaiser Family Foundation released a study outlining the challenges that LGBT adults face in the United States related to healthcare. According to the study, LGBT patients are “twice as likely as non-LGBT adults to report negative experiences while receiving health care in the last three years, including being treated unfairly or with disrespect (33% v. 15%) or having at least one of several other negative experiences with a provider (61% v. 31%), including a provider assuming something about them without asking, suggesting they were personally to blame for a health problem, ignoring a direct request or question, or refusing to prescribe needed pain medication.”