Being told you need to undergo a fitness-for-duty exam can be stressful. For many employees, it feels less like a routine workplace requirement and more like a threat to their job.

Maybe a supervisor questioned your ability to do your work. Maybe there was a disagreement at the office. Maybe your employer suddenly wants access to your medical information and is demanding that you see a doctor before returning to work.

If you're asking, "Can my employer force me to take a fitness-for-duty exam?" the answer depends on the circumstances.

Federal law places important limits on when employers can require medical examinations, and those protections often apply even if you have never had a disability.

What Is a Fitness-for-Duty Exam?

A fitness-for-duty exam is a medical or psychological evaluation that an employer requires to determine whether an employee can safely and effectively perform their job duties.

Employers sometimes request these evaluations after:

• Workplace incidents
• Safety concerns
• Extended medical leave
• Reports about an employee's behavior
• Questions about an employee's ability to perform essential job functions

The key issue is not whether an employer wants an exam. The question is whether they have a legally valid reason to require one.

When Can an Employer Require a Fitness-for-Duty Exam?

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers generally cannot require a current employee to undergo a medical examination unless the request is:

• Job-related, and
• Consistent with business necessity

This is an important standard.

An employer should be able to point to a legitimate work-related concern. There must be a reasonable basis for believing that an employee cannot perform essential job duties or may pose a safety risk in the workplace. An employer's curiosity, assumptions, workplace gossip, or generalized concerns are not enough.

Do You Need to Have a Disability to Be Protected?

No.

Many employees assume ADA protections only apply to workers who have disabilities. That's not always the case.

The ADA's restrictions on medical examinations are designed to protect employee privacy and prevent employers from making unnecessary inquiries into a worker's health. That means an employer may violate the law by requiring an improper medical exam even if the employee does not have a disability and has never claimed one.

Can an Unjustified Medical Exam Be Illegal?

Yes.

An improperly required fitness-for-duty exam can be more than just an inconvenience. Under federal law, an unjustified medical examination may itself be considered unlawful discrimination.

If an employee loses pay, benefits, work opportunities, or employment because of an improper medical exam requirement, there may be legal remedies available. Every situation is different, which is why it is important to evaluate the facts carefully and understand whether the employer's actions meet the legal standard required by the ADA.

What Should You Do If Your Employer Orders a Fitness-for-Duty Evaluation?

If your employer tells you to undergo a fitness-for-duty exam, taking the right steps early can make a significant difference.

Ask for the Reason in Writing

Request a written explanation of why the examination is being required.

A legitimate request is often tied to specific job duties, documented concerns, or workplace safety issues. Vague explanations may raise additional questions.

Understand the Scope of the Exam

Ask:

• What is being evaluated?
• Who will conduct the examination?
• Who will receive the results?
• What medical records are being requested?

The scope of the evaluation should relate to the employer's stated concerns.

Review Medical Release Forms Carefully

Do not assume every authorization form is appropriate.

Some employers or providers may request broad access to medical records that extend beyond the purpose of the examination. Make sure you understand exactly what information you are authorizing others to obtain.

Keep Detailed Records

Save emails, letters, forms, and other communications.

Document:

• Dates of conversations
• Names of decision-makers
• Time missed from work
• Lost wages
• Changes to your employment status

These records may become important if a dispute develops later.

Consider Your Options Before Refusing

Many employees want to refuse the examination immediately. While there may be situations where an employer's request is unlawful, refusing outright can sometimes lead to discipline, suspension, or unpaid leave. Before making a decision, it is important to understand your rights and the potential consequences.

What If You Were Placed on Leave or Lost Pay?

Employees are sometimes removed from work while waiting for a fitness-for-duty evaluation or the results of an examination.

If the exam was not legally justified, the financial impact can be significant. Lost wages, lost benefits, and other employment-related damages may become part of a potential legal claim. Determining whether you have a claim depends on the specific facts of your situation, the employer's reasoning, and how the examination process was handled.

Talk With a Maryland Employment Lawyer About Your Rights

If your employer is requiring a fitness-for-duty exam, demanding medical information, or placing your job at risk because of a medical evaluation, it is important to understand your legal options.

The experienced employment attorneys at Lebau & Neuworth represent employees throughout Maryland in workplace disputes involving disability rights, wrongful termination, discrimination, retaliation, and other employment law matters. Our team can evaluate your situation, explain your rights, and help you determine whether your employer's actions comply with federal and state law. Contact Lebau & Neuworth today to schedule a confidential consultation.

A practical, worker-side guide to noncompetes in Maryland and the District of Columbia.

If you live in the D.C. or Maryland area and your employer has just put a noncompete in front of you, the single most important question is not what does it say? — it is which side of the Beltway are you on? Maryland and the District of Columbia have moved to restrict noncompete agreements over the last five years, but they have done so in very different ways, with very different thresholds, and with very different consequences for the worker who reads the fine print too late.

01 — The Federal Backdrop

The FTC ban is gone and almost forgotten.

You may remember the headlines: in April 2024, the Federal Trade Commission issued a sweeping rule banning most noncompetes nationwide. That rule never took effect. The FTC, itself voted to vacate the rule. In February 2026, the FTC formally removed the noncompete rule from its books.

What this means for you: there is no federal noncompete ban. The FTC is not your safety net. Whether your noncompete is enforceable depends almost entirely on the law of your State or the District of Columbia.

02 — Maryland

A patchwork that punches hardest at low wages and direct patient care.

Maryland regulates noncompetes through a statute (Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 3-716) layered on top of decades of common-law decisions. There are four buckets to know.

The Low-Wage Worker Ban

Maryland voids any noncompete imposed on an employee earning at or below 150% of the State minimum wage. As Maryland’s minimum wage climbs, so does this ceiling. Because the statute keys off 150% of the State minimum wage, a higher county or local minimum wage (such as Montgomery County’s) does not raise this ceiling.

The Healthcare-Specific Ban (the big 2025 change)

This is the most consequential recent change in Maryland law, and the one most physicians, PAs, nurses, nurse practitioners, dentists, and other clinicians need to understand. House Bill 1388, signed in April 2024, took effect for agreements executed on or after July 1, 2025. It applies to anyone:

• required to be licensed under the Maryland Health Occupations Article, and
• employed in a position that provides direct patient care.

If you earn $350,000 or less in total annual compensation, a noncompete or “conflict of interest” provision in your contract is void. If you earn more than $350,000, your employer can still impose one — but the statute puts a hard ceiling on it: a maximum of 1 year from your last day of employment, and a geographic radius of no more than 10 miles from your primary place of employment. The employer must also notify patients when a healthcare professional affected by these restrictions moves to a new practice location. One critical point of timing: this healthcare ban is not retroactive. It applies only to agreements executed on or after July 1, 2025. If you signed a noncompete before that date, it remains valid (subject to its enforceability) until you sign a new agreement.

The Veterinary Ban

If you are licensed in Maryland as a veterinary practitioner or veterinary technician, noncompetes against you are void regardless of what you earn. This is a flat ban with no compensation carve-out.

Everyone Else: Common-Law Reasonableness

For the rest of the Maryland workforce — sales professionals, executives, middle managers, engineers, marketing staff, and so on — Maryland courts apply a fact-intensive reasonableness test. A court will only enforce a noncompete if it:

• protects a legitimate business interest (trade secrets, client goodwill, confidential information — not just “competition”);
• is no broader than necessary in time, geographic reach, and the activities it restricts;
• does not impose an undue hardship on the employee; and
• is not contrary to public policy.

Maryland follows the blue-pencil doctrine from Holloway v. Faw, Casson & Co., 319 Md. 324, 572 A.2d 510 (1990). Maryland courts take a relatively flexible approach: a judge may not only strike unreasonable language but, in appropriate cases, narrow an overbroad restriction and enforce it as modified. The practical lesson for workers is the opposite of reassuring: an overbroad noncompete will not always fail outright, so do not assume an aggressive clause is automatically unenforceable — have it reviewed before you sign.

03 — The District of Columbia

The stricter framework.

The District of Columbia has the tougher noncompete regime. The current law, the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020, scaled back and clarified by the 2022 Amendment Act, has been in force since October 1, 2022.

The starting point is a presumption of illegality: D.C. employers may not request or require a “covered employee” to sign a noncompete. A covered employee is essentially anyone who is not a “highly compensated employee” and who either spends more than half of their work time in D.C. or is based in D.C. The thresholds for “highly compensated” are recalculated every January for inflation. For 2026, they are: $162,164 in total annual compensation for most employees, and $270,274 for “medical specialists.”

“Medical specialist” is defined narrowly: a licensed physician who has completed a residency and works for an employer that primarily provides medical services. A staff nurse, a PA, a dentist, or a physician early in residency is not a medical specialist for D.C. purposes, those workers fall under the general $162,164 threshold.

If the noncompete is allowed, it still has to clear five hurdles

Even when your compensation lets your employer use a noncompete, the agreement is unenforceable in D.C. unless it:

1. Specifies the functional scope — which services, roles, industries, or specific competitors you are barred from;
2. Specifies a geographic limit;
3. Lasts no more than 365 days after separation (or 730 days for medical specialists);
4. Is provided to you at least 14 days before you start, or at least 14 days before you are asked to sign if you already work there; and
5. Comes with the District’s required statutory notice of rights.

Two specific D.C. wrinkles to know

Broadcast industry employees cannot be subjected to a noncompete in D.C. at all, regardless of pay.

Anti-moonlighting policies — Your employer telling you that you cannot have a second job while employed there — are regulated separately and require written notice to the employee.

04 — Side by Side

Maryland and D.C., compared.

THE COMPARISON · 2026

	MARYLAND	DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Source of law	Statute (§ 3-716) + common law	Statute (D.C. Law 23-209, as amended by D.C. Law 24-175; D.C. Code § 32-581.01 et seq.)
General wage floor below which noncompetes are void	150% of state minimum wage	$162,164 in 2026(rises annually with CPI)
Healthcare carve-out	Direct patient care + license + ≤ $350,000 = void; above = capped at 1 yr / 10 miles	Below $270,274 (medical specialists): void; above: up to 2 yrs with limits
Veterinarians & vet techs	Total ban, any salary	No specific provision
Broadcast employees	No specific rule	Total ban, any salary
Max duration (high earners, non-medical)	"Reasonable" (case-by-case)	1 year, hard cap
Max duration (medical specialists)	1 year (statutory)	2 years (statutory)
14-day advance review period	Not required	Required by statute
Mandatory written notice of rights	Not required (must notify patients when an affected provider moves to a new practice location)	Required (specific statutory language)
Anti-moonlighting policies	Permitted (common-law reasonableness applies)	Permitted only in limited cases, with notice
Non-solicitation & NDAs	Generally allowed if reasonable	Generally allowed; NDAs expressly carved out

05 — What To Do

If a noncompete just landed on your desk.

01.   Don’t sign it yet.

In D.C. the 14-day review window is your legal right. In Maryland there is no statutory window, but ask anyway — refusing a reasonable review period is a tell about how the employer will treat you later.

02.   Map yourself onto the thresholds.

Calculate your total annual compensation, including bonuses, commissions, and (in D.C.) vested equity. Confirm the jurisdiction by where you actually work, not where the company is headquartered.

03.   Read the clause for traps.

A noncompete that says “the United States” or “any business in the same industry” is almost certainly unenforceable in both jurisdictions — but you still want the language fixed before you sign, not after.

04.   Look past the noncompete to the non-solicitation and NDA.

In our experience, these clauses do more damage to mobility than the noncompete itself, and they are far more likely to be enforceable in both Maryland and D.C.

0.4 Get a lawyer to review before you sign — not after.

A review before you sign costs a fraction of what litigating over an unclear clause will cost two years from now. This is true on both sides of the Beltway.

ABOUT LEBAU & NEUWORTH, LLC

Lebau & Neuworth, LLC is an employment law firm representing workers — including physicians, sales professionals, executives, and middle managers — in Maryland and the District of Columbia. We do not represent employers. If you have been asked to sign a noncompete, or you are leaving a job covered by one, we are happy to review your agreement and walk you through your options.

DISCLAIMERThis document is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney–client relationship. Maryland and District of Columbia noncompete law is complex and fact-specific; the rules summarized here are accurate as of May 2026 but may change, and important details (such as how “total annual compensation” is calculated, whether a particular employee qualifies as a “medical specialist,” and how the District’s “covered employee” geography test applies to hybrid and remote workers) often turn on specifics the law has not fully resolved

What workers in staffing agency and subcontractor jobs should know about joint employer liability

Today, many workers report to one company every day while technically being paid by another. That setup is common in staffing agency jobs, subcontractor arrangements, warehouse work, healthcare staffing, construction, hospitality, and other industries that rely on contract labor.

When unpaid overtime, wage violations, or denied leave happen, companies sometimes try to shift responsibility to each other. One business claims it was “just the staffing agency,” while the other says it did not control the worksite. Under federal employment law, though, more than one company may still be legally responsible.

A proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Labor could create a more uniform standard for determining when businesses qualify as “joint employers” under laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). For workers across Maryland and the DC metro area, the proposal could directly affect wage claims, overtime disputes, and other workplace protections.

How Joint Employer Liability Works in Staffing and Contract Labor Jobs

Joint employment means that two or more companies can be legally responsible for the same worker at the same time. This issue often comes up when:

• A staffing agency places workers at another company’s facility
• A subcontractor supplies labor for a larger business
• A company outsources parts of its workforce to third-party vendors
• Related businesses share employees or supervision responsibilities

In these situations, investigators and courts look beyond payroll paperwork and job titles to determine who actually controls the work being performed.

The most common situation is called vertical joint employment. This usually involves a staffing agency and the company where the employee actually works each day. Under the proposed rule, the Department of Labor would evaluate factors such as:

• Which company can hire or fire the worker
• Who controls schedules and working conditions
• Which business determines pay rates or payment methods
• Who keeps employment records
• Whether the worker depends economically on the company
• Where the work is being performed and who controls the location

No single factor decides the issue. Instead, the government would examine the full working relationship and how much real-world control each company has over the employee.

Why Day-to-Day Control Matters in Wage and Hour Disputes

One of the biggest takeaways from the proposal is that actual workplace control matters more than labels in a contract.

A company may still face liability if its supervisors direct workers, manage schedules, oversee productivity, or influence workplace conditions on a daily basis. That can be true even if the company tries to distance itself from workers on paper.

For employees dealing with unpaid overtime, denied wages, or leave violations, documentation can become extremely important. Helpful evidence may include:

• Work schedules
• Emails and text messages
• Supervisor instructions
• Timekeeping practices
• Reporting structures at the worksite

The proposal also addresses horizontal joint employment, which can apply when employees work for multiple related companies that share operations, management, or staffing responsibilities.

What the Proposed Department of Labor Rule Could Mean for Maryland Workers

Workers in temporary staffing, warehouse operations, healthcare support, logistics, hospitality, and construction jobs are often affected the most by these employment structures. When companies divide responsibilities between multiple entities, employees may struggle to determine:

• Who owes overtime pay
• Which employer is responsible for leave protections
• Who can be held accountable for labor law violations
• Which company controls workplace policies and schedules

A clearer joint employer standard could make it more difficult for businesses to avoid responsibility by blaming staffing agencies or subcontractors.

The proposed rule is currently in a public comment period through June 22, 2026. Workers, advocates, and employment attorneys still have an opportunity to weigh in before the rule becomes final.

Speak With Baltimore Employment Lawyers About Staffing Agency and Wage Disputes

If you work through a staffing agency, subcontractor, or temporary labor arrangement and believe your rights have been violated, understanding who may be legally responsible is critical.

At Lebau & Neuworth, our employment attorneys represent workers across Maryland and the DC metro area in cases involving unpaid wages, overtime disputes, workplace discrimination, wrongful termination, and other employment law violations.

We understand how complicated employment relationships can become when multiple companies are involved. Our team works to identify who truly controlled the workplace and fight for accountability when employee rights are ignored.

Being pregnant should not put your job in danger. Still, many Maryland employees notice a sudden shift at work after announcing a pregnancy, requesting accommodations, or discussing maternity leave. A supervisor who was once supportive may become critical. 

So, is it legal to be pregnant and put on a performance plan? Sometimes, yes. Employers can still address legitimate performance concerns during pregnancy. But pregnancy cannot be the reason for discipline, heightened scrutiny, reduced responsibilities, retaliation, or termination.

Here at Lebau & Neuworth, we understand how frightening it can feel when your job suddenly seems unstable during pregnancy. 

Can An Employer Put A Pregnant Employee On A Performance Plan?

An employer is not automatically prohibited from placing a pregnant employee on a performance improvement plan. Pregnancy does not make an employee immune from workplace policies, performance expectations, or disciplinary processes.

A PIP may be lawful if it is based on clear, documented, consistent performance concerns that existed before pregnancy disclosure and are applied the same way to other employees. A PIP may be unlawful if it is exaggerated, unsupported, inconsistent with past reviews, or used to push a pregnant employee out.

The key question is not just, “Can my employer issue a PIP?” The better question is, “Why now?”

When A Performance Plan May Be Legitimate

Some performance plans are legitimate. For example, if an employee had documented issues before pregnancy, received consistent feedback, and is being treated the same as non-pregnant coworkers, an employer may be able to justify the PIP.

A legitimate PIP should usually be specific, fair, and tied to measurable job expectations. It should explain what needs to improve, how success will be evaluated, and what support the employer will provide. It should not be vague, shifting, or impossible to satisfy.

Even when a PIP appears legitimate on paper, employees should still pay attention to context. A document can look neutral while the surrounding facts suggest a different story.

Why Timing Matters After A Pregnancy Announcement

Timing is often one of the most important facts in a pregnancy discrimination or retaliation case. If you had positive reviews for years and were suddenly criticized days or weeks after announcing your pregnancy, requesting a schedule adjustment, or submitting a doctor’s note, that timing may matter.

Timing alone does not prove illegal conduct, but it can raise serious questions. Employers rarely say, “We are disciplining you because you are pregnant.” Instead, discrimination often appears through sudden criticism, unrealistic expectations, changed standards, or a paper trail that begins only after pregnancy-related news.

What Employers Cannot Legally Do

Employers cannot treat an employee worse because she is pregnant, may become pregnant, recently gave birth, requested pregnancy-related accommodations, or needs pregnancy-related medical care. They also cannot retaliate against an employee for asserting protected rights.

Workplace Action	Why It May Be A Warning Sign
Sudden PIP after pregnancy announcement	May suggest pregnancy affected the employer’s decision
New criticism after requesting accommodations	May suggest retaliation for protected activity
Different standards than coworkers	May support unequal treatment evidence
Pressure to resign or sign documents quickly	May affect legal rights and future claims

If these issues are happening, do not ignore them. A confidential case review can help you understand whether the facts suggest discrimination, retaliation, or a legitimate workplace dispute.

Signs The Performance Plan May Be Pregnancy Discrimination

Pregnancy discrimination can be subtle. It does not always involve openly hostile comments or obvious demotions. Sometimes it looks like management quietly building a record against an employee after learning she is pregnant.

One common warning sign is a sudden negative review after a positive performance history. If your previous evaluations praised your work, but your employer now claims long-standing problems that were never raised before, that inconsistency may be important.

Another warning sign is increased scrutiny after requesting accommodations. For example, if you ask for modified duties, a schedule adjustment, more frequent breaks, or temporary relief from lifting, and your supervisor responds by monitoring you more harshly than others, the PIP may not be neutral.

Different treatment compared to other employees also matters. If non-pregnant coworkers make similar mistakes without discipline, miss deadlines without a PIP, or receive coaching instead of formal warnings, that comparison may support a pregnancy discrimination claim.

Here at Lebau & Neuworth, we understand that many employees second-guess themselves when treatment changes gradually. Trust your instincts. If the workplace changed after your pregnancy became known, start documenting what changed and when.

What Counts As Pregnancy Retaliation In Maryland?

Retaliation happens when an employer punishes an employee for engaging in protected activity. In the pregnancy context, protected activity may include requesting accommodations, reporting discrimination, objecting to unfair treatment, asking about maternity leave, or providing medical documentation related to pregnancy.

A retaliation claim does not always require termination. Retaliation can include reduced hours, removal from projects, demotion, isolation from meetings, hostile treatment, increased discipline, or a sudden PIP.

Termination after pregnancy disclosure is one of the most serious warning signs. If your employer fires you after learning you are pregnant, after you request leave, or after you ask for accommodations, you may want to speak with a wrongful termination lawyer quickly.

What Protections Do Maryland Employees Have During Pregnancy?

Maryland employees may have protections under both federal and state law. These laws generally prohibit pregnancy discrimination, protect employees from retaliation, and may require reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related limitations.

Federal protections include laws that prohibit sex and pregnancy discrimination and require reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions when required by law. Maryland law also provides important protections for pregnancy-related conditions and workplace accommodations.

Reasonable accommodations may include changes that allow an employee to continue working safely, depending on the job and medical needs. Examples may include modified duties, schedule adjustments, more frequent breaks, temporary transfer to a less strenuous role, or time for medical appointments.

Your employee rights may depend on your employer, your job duties, your medical restrictions, and the actions taken against you. A performance plan does not erase those rights.

What Should You Document If You Are Pregnant And On A PIP?

Documentation is one of the most important steps you can take if you believe your employer is building a case against you because of pregnancy. You do not need to prove everything on your own before calling a lawyer, but preserving the right information early can make a major difference.

Start by documenting timing. Write down when you announced your pregnancy, who you told, how they responded, when you requested accommodations, and when the criticism or PIP began. A clear timeline can help show whether the employer’s behavior changed after pregnancy-related events.

Preserve written communications. Save emails, messages, performance reviews, meeting notes, schedules, accommodation requests, doctor’s notes, and HR communications. 

Pay attention to changes in management behavior. Did your supervisor stop including you in meetings? Were your responsibilities reduced? Were you suddenly criticized for things that were previously acceptable? 

Helpful records may include:

• Prior positive reviews, praise, bonuses, promotions, or performance metrics
• Emails or messages showing when you disclosed pregnancy or requested accommodations
• The PIP, disciplinary notices, HR communications, and any responses you submitted

What Should You Do If You Believe Retaliation Is Happening?

Do not ignore sudden workplace changes. Many employees hope the situation will calm down on its own, but retaliation and discrimination can escalate quickly. A PIP may be the first step toward termination, demotion, or forced resignation.

At the same time, avoid reacting emotionally at work. That does not mean staying silent forever. It means being strategic. Respond in writing when appropriate, ask for clarification, and avoid giving the employer an excuse to claim you were unprofessional.

Be cautious about signing documents. Employers may ask employees to sign PIPs, disciplinary forms, severance agreements, or resignation paperwork. Some signatures may simply acknowledge receipt, while others may affect your rights. 

A workplace retaliation claim can depend on timing, documentation, employer explanations, and whether the employer’s stated reasons are consistent with the facts.

When Should You Contact A Maryland Employment Lawyer?

You should contact a lawyer as soon as you suspect your pregnancy may be affecting how you are being treated at work. You do not need to wait until you are fired. In fact, early legal guidance may help you avoid mistakes, preserve evidence, and make informed decisions before the situation gets worse.

Here at Lebau & Neuworth, we understand that employees often call us while they are still employed, scared, and unsure whether they are “overreacting.” You are not overreacting by asking questions about your rights. If your instincts tell you something changed after your pregnancy became known, it is reasonable to get advice.

Employment attorneys evaluate pregnancy claims by looking at the full timeline, including performance history, manager comments, accommodation requests, comparator evidence, HR involvement, and the employer’s stated reasons for discipline.

A Maryland employment lawyer can help you understand your options while protecting your career, finances, and future.

Lebau & Neuworth Helps Maryland Employees Protect Their Rights During Pregnancy

If you are pregnant and put on a performance plan, you may feel anxious, isolated, and unsure what to do next. Those feelings are understandable. Your job, income, health, and future may all feel at risk at the same time.

Here at Lebau & Neuworth, we understand how serious these moments are for Maryland employees. We represent workers, not employers, and we help employees recognize when workplace discipline may be masking discrimination or retaliation.

If your employer’s treatment changed after your pregnancy announcement, accommodation request, or maternity leave discussion, do not wait until the situation becomes irreversible. Call (410) 296-3030 or contact us online to discuss your rights and options.

(more…)

Lebau & Neuworth | Employment Law Blog

Retaliation claims are among the most commonly filed workplace claims in the country, yet they are also widely misunderstood. According to the EEOC, retaliation allegations have remained the most frequently asserted category in employment charges for years. In fiscal year 2024, retaliation was included in nearly half of all charges filed with the agency.

Many employees assume that if something negative happens shortly after they raise concerns at work, they automatically have a retaliation claim. Sometimes that is true. In many situations, however, the issue is more complicated because the law only protects certain types of workplace complaints and activities.

Retaliation Claims Involve More Than Timing

Employees often contact an attorney after being fired, demoted, disciplined, or pushed out shortly after speaking up at work. Timing can absolutely matter in retaliation cases, especially when adverse action closely follows a complaint. But close timing by itself does not necessarily establish a legal claim.

Most retaliation claims require employees to prove three basic elements:

• They engaged in protected activity
• Their employer took adverse action against them
• There was a connection between the two events

The first issue is often where claims become difficult. Many employees can clearly point to discipline, termination, reduced hours, or other negative treatment. What becomes disputed is whether the employee was participating in activity the law actually protects.

What Qualifies as Protected Activity?

Protected activity generally means asserting rights connected to unlawful workplace conduct. Federal and state employment laws protect employees who raise concerns involving discrimination, harassment, accommodations, wage violations, or other legally protected issues.

That can include situations involving:

• Complaints about discrimination based on race, sex, religion, disability, pregnancy, age, or national origin
• Requests for disability, pregnancy, or religious accommodations
• Participation in internal investigations or EEOC proceedings
• Reports involving wage violations or unsafe working conditions
• Complaints covered by applicable whistleblower laws

Courts and agencies typically focus on whether the employee was opposing conduct prohibited by law or exercising a legally protected right. General workplace frustration, standing alone, is usually not enough.

Unfair Treatment Does Not Always Equal Illegal Retaliation

One of the most frustrating realities for employees is that workplace behavior can be unfair, hostile, or unprofessional without necessarily violating employment laws.

Employees frequently describe managers playing favorites, toxic work environments, rude supervisors, inconsistent discipline, or office politics that create stressful working conditions. Those situations can be very real and personally damaging. But unless the conduct is connected to discrimination, retaliation, or another protected legal issue, the law may not recognize it as unlawful.

For example, statements like these often do not qualify as protected activity on their own:

• “My manager treats me unfairly.”
• “The office environment is toxic.”
• “My supervisor is difficult to work with.”
• “They reduced my hours without explanation.”

By contrast, complaints tied to protected characteristics or legal rights are treated very differently. Saying, “I believe I’m being treated differently because of my pregnancy,” raises a substantially different legal issue than simply complaining about unfair treatment in general.

Why Specific Language Can Matter

In retaliation cases, courts often examine the exact nature of the complaint being made. Employers may not dispute that an employee complained about something at work. Instead, the disagreement may center on whether the employee actually raised concerns about unlawful conduct.

That is one reason documentation can become extremely important. Emails, HR complaints, written reports, text messages, and internal communications may later help establish what concerns were raised and how the employer responded.

Employees also sometimes rely entirely on informal verbal complaints without creating any written record. While verbal complaints can still be protected in some circumstances, vague conversations can become much harder to prove later if there is disagreement about what was actually said.

Steps Employees Should Consider

Employees who believe they are being retaliated against should take steps to preserve information early, particularly if disciplinary action or termination may follow.

Depending on the circumstances, that may include:

• Saving emails and written communications
• Keeping copies of disciplinary notices or performance reviews
• Documenting important meetings and conversations
• Reviewing internal complaint procedures
• Speaking with an employment attorney before resigning

Employment cases are often highly fact-specific, and details that initially seem minor can become important later during litigation or agency investigations.

Representing Employees Across Maryland and the DC Metro Area

Lebau & Neuworth represents employees in matters involving retaliation, wrongful termination, workplace discrimination, harassment, and wage disputes. Based in Baltimore, our attorneys represent workers throughout Maryland and the DC metro area and focus exclusively on employee-side employment law matters.

If you believe your employer retaliated against you after asserting your workplace rights, speaking with an attorney early can help you better understand your legal options, preserve evidence, and avoid missing important filing deadlines.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently released updated guidance on telework as a disability accommodation. While it’s technically directed at federal agencies, it reflects how the EEOC interprets the law more broadly, including how private employers are expected to handle remote work requests.

For employees in Maryland and DC, this matters more than it might seem at first glance. If you’ve been denied remote work, or forced back into the office despite a medical condition - this guidance gives a clearer picture of when that decision may cross the line.

Telework as a Disability Accommodation Under the ADA

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers have to provide reasonable accommodations when they allow an employee with a disability to perform the essential functions of their job. Telework is one of those accommodations, and the EEOC’s guidance reinforces that it should be treated as a legitimate option - not something employers can dismiss out of hand.

That doesn’t mean every request has to be approved. The focus is on whether working remotely actually allows you to do your job. If it does, your employer is supposed to weigh that seriously instead of defaulting to an in-office requirement.

Why Blanket “No Remote Work” Policies Can Be a Legal Problem

One of the clearest points in the EEOC’s guidance is that employers cannot rely on broad, one-size-fits-all rules when handling accommodation requests. Many employees are still hearing things like “we don’t allow remote work anymore” or “everyone has to be back in the office,” especially as return-to-office policies have become more common.

The issue is that disability law doesn’t work that way. Employers are required to look at each request individually. If a company applies a blanket rule without considering your specific situation, that can violate the law, even if the policy applies to everyone else.

How Prior Remote Work Can Support Your Accommodation Request

A lot of employees were able to work remotely during the pandemic and continue to do so successfully. When those arrangements are suddenly reversed, employers often argue that the earlier remote work was temporary and doesn’t change anything going forward.

The EEOC’s guidance takes a more practical view. If you were able to perform your job duties from home, that history can be strong evidence that telework is a workable accommodation. It doesn’t automatically entitle you to keep working remotely, but it does make it harder for an employer to argue that being physically present is essential in every case.

When Remote Work May Be Required - Not Optional

Employers are not obligated to give you your preferred accommodation if another effective option exists. That said, the analysis changes when telework is the only accommodation that actually allows you to do your job.

This often comes up in situations where:

• A medical condition makes commuting difficult, unreliable, or unsafe
• The office environment triggers or worsens symptoms
• In-person attendance interferes with necessary treatment or recovery

When alternatives don’t solve the problem, simply offering something different - like a modified schedule or workspace adjustment, may not be enough to meet legal requirements. In those cases, remote work may move from being one option among many to something the employer is required to provide.

The Interactive Process Applies to Telework Requests

Employers are required to engage in what’s known as the interactive process, which is essentially a back-and-forth to figure out what accommodation works. In a telework context, that process should involve a real discussion about your limitations and whether remote work would allow you to perform your job effectively.

A proper interactive process usually includes reviewing medical information, discussing how your condition affects your work, and considering different options before making a decision. When employers skip that process - or shut it down early - it can raise legal concerns, especially if the request is dismissed without meaningful evaluation.

Return-to-Office Policies Do Not Override ADA Obligations

Many companies across Maryland and DC have adopted return-to-office policies, and those policies by themselves are not unlawful. The problem arises when those policies are treated as absolute, without any room for accommodation.

Even with a company-wide push for in-person work, employers still have to comply with disability law. That means they cannot revoke an existing accommodation or deny a new request without reassessing the employee’s situation. A return-to-office policy does not eliminate the obligation to make reasonable accommodations where required.

Signs a Telework Accommodation Denial May Be Unlawful

Not every denial of remote work is illegal, but certain patterns come up frequently in cases that raise concerns. If your employer handles your request in a way that seems dismissive or predetermined, it may be worth taking a closer look.

Some common red flags include:

• Refusing to consider telework at all
• Relying on a blanket policy instead of an individual assessment
• Ignoring evidence that you can perform your job remotely
• Offering alternatives that don’t actually address your limitations
• Ending the conversation without engaging in the interactive process

When these issues are present, the denial may not be consistent with how the law is supposed to work.

What Employees Should Do When Requesting Telework

If you’re asking for remote work as an accommodation, how you present the request can matter. Clear communication and documentation often make a difference, especially if there’s a dispute later on.

It’s usually helpful to:

• Put your request in writing so there’s a record
• Explain how your condition affects your ability to work in person
• Provide medical support when appropriate
• Keep copies of your employer’s responses and decisions

Taking these steps won’t guarantee approval, but they can put you in a stronger position if your employer does not handle the request properly.

Talk to a Maryland or DC Employment Lawyer About Telework Denials

At Lebau & Neuworth, we represent employees across Maryland and DC in disability accommodation and workplace rights cases. Issues involving remote work have become more common as companies shift policies, and many employees are left trying to figure out whether a denial was actually lawful.

If you’ve been denied the ability to work remotely, or required to return to the office despite a medical condition, it may be worth getting a clearer understanding of your rights and options.