Opinion ID: 204169
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Richardson's Ability to Perform the Essential Functions of her Position with a Reasonable Accommodation

Text: Richardson bears the burden of proving that a proposed accommodation would enable her to perform the essential functions of her job and that, at least on the face of things, [the accommodation] is feasible for the employer under the circumstances. Tobin v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. ( Tobin II ), 553 F.3d 121, 136 (1st Cir.2009). Richardson argues that the only accommodation she needed was the ability to perform certain manual tasks in a modified manner. As we have already explained, it would be unreasonable for a jury to conclude that Richardson was able to perform her essential function of physically assisting with the restaurant's operations even when the modifications are taken into account. Richardson also argues that, as a manager, it was reasonable for her to delegate certain manual tasks to other restaurant employees. That argument does not take her far. [T]he law does not require an employer to accommodate a disability by foregoing an essential function of the position or by reallocating essential functions to make other workers' jobs more onerous. Mulloy, 460 F.3d at 153 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). On the facts of this case, it would be unreasonable for Richardson to delegate so many tasks that she would no longer be performing her essential function of physically assisting with the restaurant's operations. Richardson must be able to perform a sufficient number of manual tasks on her own. As explained above, she has not shown that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she can do that.