Updated January 28, 2026
11 Real Disability Discrimination Examples in California Workplaces
Disability discrimination examples in California workplaces remain alarmingly common, despite strong legal protections for employees with disabilities. Unfortunately, many workers continue to face unfair treatment, harassment, and denial of reasonable accommodations, often without realizing their rights are being violated.
While California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) offers even broader protections than the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), workplace discrimination persists in both subtle and blatant forms. In fact, disability discrimination consistently ranks among the top complaints filed with California's Civil Rights Department each year.
Understanding what disability discrimination looks like in real situations is the first step toward recognizing and addressing it. From denied accommodations to wrongful termination, harassment, or retaliation, these violations can significantly impact your career, financial stability, and emotional wellbeing.
This guide examines 11 actual disability discrimination scenarios that have occurred in California workplaces, explaining why each example constitutes illegal discrimination and outlining the legal protections available to affected employees. Whether you've experienced similar treatment or want to understand your rights better, these real-world examples provide valuable insight into disability discrimination and the remedies available under California law.
1. Refusal to Provide Reasonable Accommodations
Reasonable accommodation refusals represent one of the most common forms of disability discrimination in California workplaces. These denials create substantial barriers for qualified employees who could otherwise perform their jobs effectively with proper support.
What happened in the refusal to provide reasonable accommodations
In a typical scenario, an employee with documented chronic back pain requested an ergonomic chair costing $300, but the employer flatly refused without discussing alternatives . Similarly, employers often deny requests for:
- Modified work schedules for employees with medical conditions requiring different sleep patterns
- Assistive technology for employees with visual impairments
- Policy modifications or exceptions for employees with mental health conditions
These blanket denials frequently occur without any individualized assessment or attempt to engage in dialog about possible solutions .
Why refusal to provide reasonable accommodations is discriminatory
Refusing reasonable accommodations directly violates both California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) . These laws recognize that accommodations aren't special treatment but essential measures that enable qualified employees to perform their jobs on equal footing with non-disabled colleagues . Moreover, FEHA explicitly makes it unlawful for employers to fail to engage in a timely, good faith interactive process .
Legal protections around reasonable accommodations
California law requires employers with five or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations unless doing so would cause "undue hardship" . This standard sets a higher bar for employers compared to federal law, meaning accommodation requests have a better chance of success under California provisions . Furthermore, the interactive process must involve individualized assessment of both the job requirements and the employee's specific limitations . Consequently, blanket policies against accommodations (like "no light duty" rules) without case-by-case evaluation violate FEHA's requirements .
2. Wrongful Termination After Medical Disclosure=
Medical disclosures in the workplace often lead to illegal firings, as seen in numerous disability discrimination examples across California.
What happened in the wrongful termination case
One notable case involved WR, a dedicated employee at a California non-profit who experienced an epileptic seizure at work. Following a week of recovery, WR returned to work only to be terminated within a month. The employer claimed her position's grant funding had ended, yet she was the only person in her department to be fired. Additionally, an executive had been overheard calling her "a liability" after learning about her seizure .
Why this termination was discriminatory
Such terminations qualify as discrimination because they occur primarily due to the employee's disclosed disability rather than performance issues. The timing of termination—shortly after medical disclosure—often reveals the true motive . In WR's case, the employer's claim about grant funding appeared to be a pretext, particularly when coupled with comments about her being a "liability" .
Relevant California laws violated
Terminations following medical disclosures typically violate:
- California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), which prohibits firing employees based on physical or mental disabilities
- Government Code § 12940(a), which makes it unlawful to terminate employees because of disabilities if they can perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodations
- Federal ADA protections against disability-based discrimination in employment decisions
Importantly, employers must engage in an interactive process before considering termination .
3. Harassment Based on Disability
Workplace harassment based on disability remains a serious form of discrimination that creates hostile environments for California employees with disabilities.
What harassment looked like in this case
In one notable California case, a severely obese employee faced repeated humiliation when her manager mockingly laughed at her uniform size requirements, questioned whether she had considered weight-loss surgery, and instructed kitchen staff not to give her extra food because "she did not need it" . Harassment often takes various forms:
- Offensive jokes, slurs, or nicknames related to disabilities
- Mimicking or mocking a disability (such as imitating someone's stutter)
- Physical threats or intimidation
- Social exclusion from team activities or meetings
Why it qualifies as disability discrimination
Harassment becomes illegal discrimination when it is either severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment . Even though some comments might seem like "jokes," intent is irrelevant when the effect is harmful . Indeed, harassment can occur even when the harasser knows the victim doesn't actually have a disability .
Legal consequences for workplace harassment
Under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, employers face strict liability for harassment committed by supervisors . Importantly, individual employees who engage in harassment can also be held personally liable . To prevail in court, employees must demonstrate the harassment affected their employment conditions by creating an abusive environment .
4. Demotion After Requesting Accommodation
Demotions that follow disability accommodation requests represent a concerning pattern of workplace discrimination, with many California employees experiencing sudden career setbacks after disclosing their needs.
What happened in the demotion case
In a typical case, a warehouse worker in California requested a reasonable accommodation for a physical disability that affected meeting certain quotas. Initially, the employee had satisfactory performance reviews. Nevertheless, shortly after submitting the formal accommodation request, the employee was suddenly demoted to a lower-paying position with reduced responsibilities and status. The employer claimed "restructuring" as the justification, yet no other employees in similar roles faced demotion.
Why demotion after accommodation request is illegal
Demotions following accommodation requests generally violate California law when there is a causal connection between the request and the adverse action. The timing alone—when demotion occurs soon after requesting accommodation—often serves as crucial evidence of discriminatory intent. Under both federal ADA and California law, employers cannot take adverse actions against employees specifically because they exercised their legal right to request accommodations.
How FEHA protects against this
California's Fair Employment and Housing Act offers robust protection against accommodation-related retaliation. FEHA specifically prohibits employers from demoting, disciplining, or taking any adverse action against employees who request reasonable accommodations. Furthermore, California law requires employers to engage in a good-faith interactive process upon learning of an employee's disability—skipping this step to implement a demotion instead constitutes a separate violation.
5. Being Denied a Promotion Due to Disability
Career advancement barriers for employees with disabilities often manifest through discriminatory promotion denials, although these cases require careful documentation to prove.
What happened in the denied promotion case
In one revealing case, an employee with a history of serious health issues requiring occasional time off was passed over for promotion. Although highly qualified with excellent performance reviews, management expressed concerns about the employee's future attendance, citing past medical leave as justification. In another instance, a parent of a child with autism was denied advancement after her supervisor stated the company believed she couldn't "juggle" her child's needs with the demands of the higher position.
Why this is considered discrimination
Promotion denials based on disability status clearly violate both California and federal law. Under FEHA, employers cannot treat qualified employees differently because of their disability status during promotion considerations. Essentially, when companies make assumptions about an employee's capabilities based on their disability—rather than their qualifications and performance—they engage in unlawful discrimination.
Legal remedies available
Employees facing promotion discrimination have several pathways to justice. First, filing a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department within one year is crucial for preserving legal rights. Following investigation, employees may pursue claims that can yield substantial remedies including:
- Recovery of lost wages and benefits
- Compensation for lost career advancement opportunities
- Potential emotional distress damages
- Attorney fees and costs if successful
Importantly, thorough documentation, including performance reviews and communications showing discriminatory intent, significantly strengthens these cases.
6. Mocking or Ridiculing a Disability
Verbal abuse and ridicule targeting employees with disabilities constitute some of the most blatant forms of workplace discrimination, yet these behaviors continue to occur in California workplaces.
What mocking looked like in the workplace
Mocking manifests through various offensive behaviors:
- Verbal harassment including teasing, jokes, and slurs based on an employee's disability
- Imitating someone's physical characteristics such as limping, stuttering, or other effects of their condition
- Making fun of necessary accommodations like ergonomic chairs or sign language interpreters
- Using derogatory nicknames or inappropriate questions about medical conditions
Real cases clearly illustrate these behaviors. In one instance, a company president repeatedly called an employee a "cripple" and, upon objection, a "hysterical basket case" . Another disturbing example involved a manager who called an employee with developmental disabilities names, slapped her face, barked at her like a dog, and threatened violence .
Why this behavior is discriminatory
Mocking creates a hostile work environment that interferes with an employee's ability to perform their job effectively. Under federal and state laws, harassment becomes illegal when it is sufficiently frequent or severe enough to create an offensive or intimidating atmosphere . Nonetheless, there's often a troubling dynamic where victims are made to feel they're overreacting if they don't "joke along" at their own expense .
Employer responsibilities under California law
California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) holds employers accountable for maintaining workplaces free from disability-based harassment . Importantly, harassment doesn't need to result in job loss to be illegal—creating a hostile environment is sufficient . FEHA extends protection beyond just employees to applicants, unpaid interns, volunteers, and contractors . Furthermore, employers must take reasonable steps to prevent and promptly address harassment .
7. Social Exclusion of Disabled Employees
Subtle yet devastating, social exclusion represents an often overlooked form of disability discrimination that isolates employees from workplace participation and advancement opportunities.
What social exclusion looked like
Social exclusion manifests through patterns of behavior rather than single incidents. In workplace settings, this frequently involves:
- Being intentionally left out of team lunches, social events, or informal gatherings
- Finding oneself excluded from important meetings or decision-making processes
- Experiencing segregation from coworkers, either physically or socially
- Being denied opportunities for training, advancement, or participation in company activities
According to research, workplace exclusion is remarkably common, with 96% of people surveyed reporting they had experienced workplace bullying by exclusion . This behavior costs US companies approximately $13 billion annually in lost productivity and worker turnover .
Why exclusion is a form of discrimination
Social exclusion qualifies as discrimination because it creates barriers to equal workplace participation. Psychologically, social exclusion triggers the same brain regions as physical pain, breeding feelings of isolation and lowering self-esteem . Subsequently, excluded employees face measurable disadvantages – people with disabilities are far less likely to be employed (35.5% compared to 76.5% of people without disabilities) .
How to document and report exclusion
Since exclusion typically manifests as a series of small behaviors over time, thorough documentation becomes crucial. For effective reporting:
- Keep a detailed journal with dates, times, descriptions, and witnesses for each incident
- Save relevant emails or communications showing patterns of exclusion
- Follow your company's complaint procedures, reporting to HR or management
- File with California's Civil Rights Department within three years of the last incident
8. Unfair Scrutiny or Micromanagement
Excessive monitoring and hypercritical supervision often target employees with disabilities, creating a form of discrimination that undermines both confidence and job performance.
What unfair scrutiny looked like
Unfair scrutiny typically involves supervisors who constantly check the work of disabled employees while allowing others to work freely. For instance, managers might continuously monitor bathroom breaks of employees with gastrointestinal disabilities or diabetes . Notably, this micromanagement frequently emerges from stereotypes about disabilities, such as assuming workers with PTSD can't handle pressure . Studies show that approximately 69% of employees consider quitting their jobs because of micromanagement , with even 64% of remote workers reporting being excessively monitored .
Why it's discriminatory under FEHA
Under California law, heightened scrutiny becomes discriminatory when targeting employees based on protected characteristics like disabilities. Constant surveillance creates immense pressure and suggests a lack of trust based on disability rather than job performance . Given that this behavior interferes with an employee's ability to perform their job, it often qualifies as harassment when persistent and pervasive .
How to respond to micromanagement
Employees facing disability-based scrutiny should:
- Document all instances with dates, times, and witnesses
- Address concerns directly with supervisors, focusing on specific behaviors rather than using the term "micromanaging"
- Contact an employment attorney to determine if the behavior constitutes illegal discrimination
- File a complaint with HR or the California Civil Rights Department if necessary
9. Retaliation After Filing a Complaint
Filing a disability discrimination complaint often triggers punitive reactions from employers, creating yet another layer of legal violations in California workplaces.
What retaliation looked like
Retaliation typically manifests through adverse employment actions that follow protected activities. Common examples include:
- Termination or demotion shortly after filing a complaint
- Receiving negative performance evaluations without justification
- Being assigned fewer shifts or undesirable work assignments
- Experiencing increased scrutiny or excessive micromanagement
- Exclusion from important meetings or projects
These actions are considered retaliatory when they occur after an employee exercises their legal rights, creating a pattern that discourages others from speaking up about discrimination.
Why retaliation is illegal
Retaliation directly violates both federal and California employment laws. The Americans with Disabilities Act explicitly protects job applicants and employees from retaliation for asserting their rights . Under California's Labor Code, employers cannot take adverse actions against employees who file complaints, with violations potentially resulting in civil penalties up to $10,000 per incident . Significantly, retaliation has become the most frequently alleged basis of discrimination in the federal sector .
Legal steps to take after retaliation
Upon facing retaliation, employees should:
- Document everything—preserve emails, record dates, times, locations, and identify witnesses
- File complaints with the appropriate agencies within required timeframes (300 days for EEOC claims)
- Demonstrate causation through timing, comments made by employers, or differential treatment compared to similarly situated colleagues
- Consult with an employment attorney to explore all legal options and potential remedies
Proving the connection between protected activity and adverse action is crucial for successful retaliation claims.
10. Discrimination in the Hiring Process
Prejudicial treatment begins early in employment relationships, with many qualified applicants facing barriers based solely on their disability status.
What happened during the hiring process
Pre-employment discrimination takes several forms in California workplaces. Approximately 25% of disabled workers report experiencing discrimination during interviews . Common scenarios include:
Job interviews abruptly ending once an employer notices a visible disability, or companies retracting offers after an applicant requests accommodations. Unfortunately, 33% of applicants do not feel comfortable disclosing their disability during job searches . This reluctance often stems from previous negative experiences where disclosure led to rejection.
Why it was discriminatory
These hiring practices constitute discrimination whenever employers make decisions based on disability rather than qualifications. The rejections reflect assumptions about capabilities without evaluating whether the person could perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodations. Occasionally, employers disguise their discriminatory intent with vague explanations like "not a good fit" .
What the law says about pre-employment questions
Federal and California laws establish clear boundaries: employers cannot ask disability-related questions before making job offers . Specifically, questions like "Do you have a disability?" or "Have you ever been treated for the following conditions?" are prohibited . Conversely, employers may inquire whether candidates can perform specific job functions with or without accommodations . Post-offer, disability questions become permissible only when all entering employees face identical inquiries .
11. Job Restructuring to Push Out Disabled Employees
Employers sometimes manipulate job duties to eliminate disabled employees when direct termination would trigger legal scrutiny. This insidious tactic involves deliberately altering work requirements until the employee can no longer perform effectively.
What job restructuring looked like
Constructive discharge through job restructuring often begins subtly. In one California case, an employee with severe arthritis requested a stool to sit on while working as a cashier. Her employer denied this simple accommodation because other employees complained about "favoritism," effectively forcing her to quit due to extreme pain. Employers typically restructure jobs by adding physically demanding tasks incompatible with known disabilities, removing assistance previously provided, or transferring employees to positions with requirements they cannot meet due to their condition.
Why it's a form of indirect discrimination
This practice constitutes indirect discrimination because it implements policies that appear neutral but disproportionately impact disabled employees. Unlike direct discrimination, these tactics create plausible deniability for employers. The law recognizes this strategy as "constructive discharge" when working conditions become so intolerable that a reasonable person would feel compelled to resign. Importantly, courts have held that failing to accommodate disabilities may itself create such intolerable conditions.
Legal protections against forced job changes
Both the ADA and California's FEHA recognize job restructuring as a required reasonable accommodation—not a weapon to push employees out. Prior to resigning, employees should document all accommodation requests and denials. Filing a formal complaint with human resources describing the intolerable conditions establishes crucial evidence. California law provides remedies including several years of back pay, attorney's fees, and potentially punitive damages.
Conclusion
Disability discrimination continues to plague California workplaces despite strong legal protections. Throughout these eleven examples, a disturbing pattern emerges of employers disregarding both legal obligations and ethical responsibilities toward employees with disabilities. Consequently, affected workers face career setbacks, financial hardship, and emotional distress that could be avoided through proper compliance with existing laws.
California's Fair Employment and Housing Act provides robust protections that exceed federal ADA requirements in many cases. Nevertheless, many employers still engage in discriminatory practices, whether through outright refusal of accommodations, harassment, wrongful termination, or more subtle tactics like excessive scrutiny and social exclusion.
Recognition remains the first crucial step toward addressing disability discrimination. Workers must understand their legal rights extend beyond mere protection from termination to include reasonable accommodations, harassment-free environments, and protection from retaliation when asserting these rights. Employers likewise benefit from understanding their legal obligations, as discrimination cases often result in substantial financial liability and damaged reputations.
Documentation plays a vital role when facing potential discrimination. Employees should maintain detailed records of all incidents, communications, and witnesses. Additionally, following proper reporting procedures through company channels before escalating to government agencies typically strengthens legal claims.
The California Civil Rights Department offers important resources for workers experiencing discrimination. Filing timely complaints preserves legal rights and opens pathways to remedies including back pay, reinstatement, and compensation for emotional distress. Undoubtedly, consulting with an employment attorney specializing in disability rights provides the best protection when navigating these complex situations.
Though disability discrimination persists, awareness and enforcement of protective laws continue to improve workplace conditions. Each successful case not only remedies individual harm but also deters future violations. Ultimately, creating truly inclusive workplaces benefits everyone – employees gain equal opportunities while employers access wider talent pools and avoid costly litigation.
References
https://www.eeoc.gov/disability-discrimination-and-employment-decisions
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/drb-disability-rights-employment.pdf
https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/accommodation/
https://www.advocatemagazine.com/article/2024-november/litigating-disability-discrimination-wrongful-termination-cases-using-the-feha
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewpulrang/2022/03/25/the-many-flavors-of-disability-bullying/
https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/complaintprocess/
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/resources/human-rights/2025-july/tech-tools-worker-surveillance-impact-workers-disabilities/
https://www.eeoc.gov/retaliation
https://www.eeoc.gov/publications/ada-your-employment-rights-individual-disability
Why Choose Setyan Law, APC?
Consulting a disability attorney will provide you with the necessary guidance and support to navigate the legal process effectively. Remember, time is of the essence, so seek legal advice promptly to maximize your chances of a successful outcome.
California Workers: Call Setyan Law at (213)-618-3655 to schedule a free consultation.
