Key Employer Takeaways From Recent Federal Guidance On Remote Work Policies

On February 12, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released new technical assistance document addressing remote work as an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The guidance was issued in response to President Trump's January 2025 Executive Order directing federal employees to work in-person and for federal agencies to eliminate remote work arrangements except in limited circumstances.

While the guidance, titled “Frequently Asked Questions from the Federal Sector about Telework Accommodations for Disabilities” (FAQ), is geared toward public agency employers, it is a useful guidepost for all employers crafting in-office work policies and responding to employee requests for remote work as an accommodation for their own serious health condition. This is particularly true as the EEOC is the federal agency that enforces general compliance with ADA requirements.

Here are the key takeaways from the FAQ:

• Employers are not required to provide remote work solely for an employee's personal benefit. If remote work prevents an employee from performing critical job duties, it is not a reasonable accommodation. The ADA does not require accommodations “that only  mitigate symptoms [of the employee's disability] without also enabling the performance of essential functions.” Remote work is only required where it enables employees and applicants with disabilities (1) to participate in the application process, (2) to perform the essential function of their job, or (3) to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment.
• With respect to mental health conditions, the FAQ states that the ADA “does not create a general right to be free from all discomfort and distress in the workplace, including anxiety. Instead, [the ADA] entitles disabled employees to a fair shot to do their jobs and enjoy the benefits and privileges of those jobs on comparable footing as their non-disabled peers. When disability-related symptoms arise in the workplace, the question is first whether the symptoms impose a material barrier to the employee's ability to work in the office . . . common anxiety, without more, is unlikely to impose a material barrier.” If there is a “demonstrated material barrier” to working in the office, then the employer must consider reasonable accommodations, including possible remote work.
• With respect to medical conditions with unpredictable “flare ups,” “it remains the case that the [employer] may choose between effective reasonable accommodations. For periodic flare-ups, leave can be a reasonable and effective option which the [employer] may choose instead of situational telework [when flare ups occur] . . . [employers] should consider whether the flare-up would materially impair the employee from performing work while teleworking and whether there is a foreseeable operational benefit to having the employee telework in lieu of leave.”
• The ADA does not require that employers provide remote work to disabled employees with difficult or lengthy commutes. “[I]n most cases, an employer has no duty to help an employee with a disability with the methods and means of [their] commute to and from work, assuming the employer does not offer such help to employees without disabilities.” Employers may be required to provide alternative accommodations such as flexible scheduling or limited term remote work. What accommodations must be explored is an individualized assessment.
• Employers can “situationally reevaluate” whether a current remote work accommodation remains effective based on individualized circumstances. Reevaluation can occur when “material changes” happen, like changes in job conditions or operational needs. The FAQ suggests some employers may find it helpful to reevaluate significant accommodations, such as full-time remote work, once a year to confirm it remains effective and manageable.
• Employers cannot take a “blanket approach” to granting or denying remote work accommodations. The ADA requires an individualized assessment of employees' medical needs and what effective alternatives to remote work exist, if any. “[A] distinction must be made between cases where telework is the only effective reasonable accommodation . . . and cases where telework is just one of several effective options. When there are several reasonable and effective options, an agency may choose an accommodation other than telework.”
• Employers are generally entitled to medical documentation to support accommodation requests. What “amounts to sufficient information will vary from case to case.” If an employee's medical circumstances change, employers may request updated documentation to support an employee's continued remote work. As part of this process, an employer may inquire about effective alternative accommodations other than remote work.
• Employees should have an opportunity to explain why a proposed alternative accommodation will be ineffective and to provide evidence to back up the assertion. The employer must consider this information. Interactive dialogues should be evidence based and supported by medical documentation – it is not enough for an employee to prospectively claim an in-office alternative is ineffective without any evidence. In these circumstances, the EEOC suggests an employer can insist the employee try out an in-office accommodation. “If the employee has returned to the office, and if their experience having returned convincingly shows that all in-office accommodations are ineffective, then the [employer] should consider placing the employee back on recurring or full-time telework, provided doing so does not remove essential functions or result in a demonstrated undue hardship on the [employer's] operations.”

While helpful, the EEOC notes the FAQ is not legally binding guidance and “courts might not defer to [the EEOC's] views.” State and local law may and oftentimes will create additional legal obligations on employers beyond (the EEOC's interpretation of) the ADA. Given the individualized nature of accommodation requests, employers are strongly encouraged to consult with legal counsel when determining whether its business has an obligation to provide remote work as a reasonable accommodation.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.