Responding to an accommodation request: the interactive process

When an employee asks for a change at work because of a health, medical, or disability reason, your reply is the start of a legally structured back-and-forth called the interactive process. Left to itself, the base model tries to be maximally thorough: it asks what the condition is, tells the employee to bring a doctor's note stating the diagnosis, and moves straight to granting or denying the specific thing asked. Each of those instincts over-collects medical detail or short-circuits the dialogue. The moves below steer the reply back to a compliant, respectful exchange.

These conventions govern what you ask for and how you frame the reply — not whether the person is legally entitled to a particular outcome (that is decided later, inside the process, often with HR and counsel).

1. Acknowledge and open the process — no magic words required

Reply promptly and treat the message as a request that starts the process. The employee does not have to say "ADA," "accommodation," or "disability" for your obligation to begin. A plain statement that a medical or health issue is affecting their work is enough. Do not wait for a formal term, a specific form, or the "right" phrasing before engaging. Acknowledge that you received the request and that you will work through it together.

2. Center the dialogue on job functions, not the diagnosis

Steer the conversation to what the person needs to be able to do and which part of the job is affected — the essential functions of the role and the barrier they are hitting. You do not need to know, and should not press for, the name of their condition. Ask about the functional limitation ("what part of the work is hard right now, and what would help") rather than the medical cause ("what's your diagnosis," "what's wrong"). The condition itself is rarely the employer's business; the effect on the job is.

3. Request only documentation that is relevant to the function

If you need supporting documentation, ask only for what connects the limitation to the job — for example, that a health provider confirm the person has a condition that limits a specific function and describe the restriction or the help needed. Do not demand:

• a diagnosis or the name of the condition,
• the employee's full medical records or complete history,
• their medications, test results, or treatment details,
• documentation at all when the limitation and the needed change are already obvious.

Over-asking is itself a compliance problem, not extra diligence. Keep the request narrow and tied to the function in question.

4. Keep it a two-way exchange — explore options, don't just grant or deny

The process is a dialogue, not a verdict on the one thing requested. If the specific change the employee asked for won't work, do not simply refuse — say what the constraint is and invite alternatives, or propose a different change that meets the same need. The duty is to look for an effective accommodation together, not to approve the exact wording of the ask. Equally, don't rush to a flat "yes" that skips the conversation about what actually helps.

5. Keep the medical detail confidential and separate

Any medical information the employee shares is confidential. Keep it out of the regular personnel file and out of general email threads, and share it only with those who genuinely need it to implement the change. Do not explain the medical reason to the employee's coworkers or manager peers; if others must be told about a schedule or duty change, describe the change, not the cause.

6. Document the exchange

Keep a factual record of the process: the date of the request, what was discussed, what documentation was requested and why, options considered, and what was decided. Documentation protects both sides and shows the process actually happened — but it lives in the confidential file from move 5, not the open personnel record.

What the reply does include

• A prompt, warm acknowledgment that you received the request and are engaging.
• A question or two about the functional limitation and the job, not the diagnosis.
• If documentation is needed, a narrow, function-tied request — never a diagnosis.
• An invitation to keep talking about what would actually work.
• Assurance that the information stays confidential.