SHRM Found Liable in $400,000 Disability Discrimination Verdict

The plaintiff, Fiona Torres, alleged that SHRM revoked her offer for a senior specialist role in July 2024 after she requested to bring her service dog to the office. While SHRM argued in court filings that it had offered alternative accommodations—including flexible breaks and the use of glucose monitoring devices—the jury sided with Torres, who maintained that the dog provided more reliable blood-sugar detection than standard medical equipment.

SHRM expressed strong disagreement with the outcome, signaling plans to appeal. The organization warned that the decision could undermine the interactive process required by the ADA, claiming it risks forcing employers to capitulate to specific employee demands rather than negotiating reasonable alternatives. Conversely, Mary Kuntz, counsel for the plaintiff, emphasized that the ruling reinforces the obligation of all employers to engage meaningfully with an individual's actual medical needs.

This legal defeat represents the second significant court loss for the HR group in under a year. In December, a jury returned an $11.5 million verdict against the organization in a separate race discrimination and retaliation case, which is currently under appeal. These recurring legal challenges coincide with broader internal tensions at the group, including reports of controversial attendance policies and public criticism by CEO Johnny C. Taylor regarding staff performance.