Opinion ID: 1367655
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: This case presents two issues for review. First, is Jane Doe's gender dysphoria a handicap under RCW 49.60.180? We hold that Doe's gender dysphoria is not a handicap under the Act. The definition of handicap for enforcement purposes in unfair practice cases under RCW 49.60.180, as defined in WAC 162-22-040, requires factual findings of both (1) the presence of an abnormal condition, and (2) employer discrimination against the plaintiff because of that condition. While gender dysphoria is an abnormal condition, we hold that Doe was not handicapped by her gender dysphoria because Boeing did not discharge her because of that condition. Second, did Boeing have to provide Doe's preferred accommodation under RCW 49.60.180? We hold that the scope of an employer's duty to reasonably accommodate an employee's abnormal condition is limited to those steps necessary to enable the employee to perform his or her job. We hold that Boeing's actions met this standard and did not discriminate against Doe by reason of her abnormal condition.