EEOC Opens the Door for Widespread Revocation of Approved Reasonable Accommodations

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has Acquiesced to the Trump Administration Demands

For thousands of federal employees, "Reasonable Accommodation" wasn't just a legal term; it was the stability that allowed them to perform their jobs successfully despite medical challenges. However, under the current administration's full-scale Return to Office (RTO) mandate, those previously approved accommodations are now in the crosshairs and the EEOC is not only complicit, it has paved the way for wide-scale revocations.

On February 11, 2026, the EEOC and OPM issued a joint technical assistance document: FAQs from the Federal Sector about Telework Accommodations for Disabilities. This joint guidance was issued on the heels of the January 7, 2026, OPM revised telework guidance. Its importance, and application in future RA related EEO complaints should not be underestimated as it will be a critical document agencies will look to in promulgating and implementing policy. While it reaffirms your rights in one sense, it also provides agencies with both the clearance and an EEOC approved roadmap to "reassess" your existing approved telework. The EEOC twisted itself into quite a pretzel around decades of precedent to get there, obviously under pressure from the Trump administration.

The Rescission Risk: Why Agencies are Moving to Revoke RAs

The 2025 Presidential Memorandum instructing agencies to "terminate remote work" has created an environment where HR departments are searching for ways to pull employees back to the office, regardless of any previously approved remote or telework status, whether approved in connection with Reasonable Accommodation or a condition of employment in the vacancy announcement to which the employee applied. According to the new EEOC guidance, with the approval of the EEOC, agencies are now attempting to justify Reasonable Accommodation rescissions using three primary tactics:

1. The "Changed Circumstances" Loophole

The EEOC guidance notes that an agency may re-evaluate an accommodation if there is a "material change" in operational needs. Agencies are now arguing that the RTO mandate itself constitutes such a change. They claim that because the policy has changed, the accommodation is no longer reasonable. This is a legal stretch subject to serious challenge.

2. Hunting for "Effective Alternatives"

The new technical FAQ reminds agencies that they aren't required to provide the employee's preferred accommodation. We are seeing a trend where agencies attempt to exchange a successful telework RA for an "in-office" alternative—such as a quiet workspace or ergonomic equipment—even when those alternatives do not address the core medical limitation that necessitates staying out of the office environment.

3. Challenging the "Essential Functions"

After years of successful remote performance, agencies are suddenly re-writing position descriptions to claim that "face-to-face collaboration" is an essential function. However, the EEOC has warned that if you have successfully performed your job remotely, the agency bears a heavy burden to prove why you suddenly cannot. This is why agencies are rushing to change position descriptions.

EEOC Opens the Door for Widespread Revocation -The "Roadmap"

The EEOC Opens the Door for Widespread Revocation in a number of ways and is clearly threading a needle in issuing joint guidance with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). On one hand, it reminds agencies of broad regulatory conclusions while at the same time, providing language such as the following:

“[when] an employer has voluntarily provided accommodations to the employee historically, that employer is not obligated to continue providing them and can discontinue such when they exceed what is legally required under the [Act].” EEOC Guidance to Federal Agencies.

"An agency may, for example, find it helpful to reevaluate a significant accommodation such as recurring or full-time telework once a year to confirm the accommodation remains effective and manageable." EEOC Guidance to Federal Agencies.

"And agencies should situationally reevaluate in response to material changes, such as a change in the employee’s condition, a change in job requirements, a change in operational needs, a change in law, etc. The President’s return-to-office instruction is a major change to agencies’ operational circumstances, and when circumstances change, agencies may wish to reevaluate previously granted recurring and full-time telework accommodations to ensure compliance with the President’s instruction." EEOC Guidance to Federal Agencies.

Employees challenging revocation of a previously approved Reasonable Accommodation may still obtain relief through the EEO complaint process. However, consideration must be given to the changing guidance when developing strategy, and PRIOR TO initiating the EEO process.

Reasonable Accommodation in Connection with Commuting - Coming Changes

The Past

Decades ago, medical concerns related to commuting for federal employees were generally considered outside the agency's purview. In fact, federal courts had ruled that employers were not legally obligated to reasonably accommodate an employee's inability to commute to work. Through its decisions, the EEOC inextricably began to link commuting concerns to reasonable accommodation.

Although some federal courts had ruled that employers were not legally obligated to reasonably accommodate an employee's inability to commute to work, the EEOC noted that these decisions might be "persuasive or instructive," but were not binding on the EEOC. It found that EEOC "precedent clearly has established that a request for telecommuting or a shorter commuting time because of a disability functionally triggers an Agency's responsibility under the Rehabilitation Act." Complainant v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 0720130029 (EEOC OFO 2015).

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's position was illustrated in two notable cases.

Alonso T. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC No. 0120162340 (EEOC 2020)

A human resources program manager for the EEOC, residing in West Virginia but working in Washington, D.C., was denied reasonable accommodation for his hypertension and back and foot impairments. Specifically, he was not permitted to telework for two days a week. A disability program manager determined that telework was unnecessary because the manager's commute, not his job duties, exacerbated his medical conditions. The EEOC acknowledged that it was an error to assume that the agency was not obligated to provide an accommodation related to commuting.

And,

Jody L. v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. 0120151351 (EEOC OFO 2018)

The Department of Defense denied an engineering technician with paralysis reasonable accommodation when a new supervisor required him to take leave rather than allowing him the option of working from home on days when the temperature was below 20 degrees, making his commute to work hazardous. Situational telework was an effective accommodation that had worked for years and was not an undue hardship. 

The Future

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has opened the door to reversing its previous stance on commuting issues in the context of Reasonable Accommodation. In it's technical bulletin, the EEOC specifically poses and answers a critical question shown below.

QUESTION: "Is an agency required to provide recurring or full-time telework to disabled employees with difficult or lengthy commutes?"

ANSWER: "Generally, no. Where the length and means of the commute are outside of the employer’s control, it is unreasonable to require the employer to excuse the employee from commuting. “[I]n most cases, an employer has no duty to help an employee with a disability with the methods and means of [their] commute to and from work, assuming the employer does not offer such help to employees without disabilities.”[38] Rather, “it is the employee’s responsibility to arrange how [they] will get to and from work.”[39]While an agency may not be required to altogether eliminate a disabled employee’s commute through telework, it may need to make some workplace modifications, such as flexible work scheduling, to enable the employee to effectively accomplish their commute and access the worksite.[40] And telework of limited duration may be reasonable if used to give the employee time to relocate closer to the worksite or secure different means for their commute." EEOC Guidance to Federal Agencies.

The shift in the EEOC position is rather stark. Employees will need to consider this shift when crafting a related EEOC complaint at the informal and formal stage.

Your Best Defense: The "Individualized Determination"

The most critical takeaway from the 2026 guidance is that blanket revocations remain unlawful (though the EEOC provides a clear roadmap for agencies to get around this issue). The EEOC explicitly states:

"We strongly caution agencies against revoking previously granted telework without first making an individualized determination in each case."

If your supervisor tells you that your telework is being revoked "because of the new administration's policy," they are likely violating the Rehabilitation Act. An RTO mandate does not grant an agency the right to bypass the interactive process. However, your agency could follow the EEOC roadmap.

How InformedFED Can Help

At InformedFED, we are already seeing a surge in "RA Reconsiderations" where agencies are trying to "undo" years of established accommodations. With 35 years of experience in federal personnel administration, law, and EEO practice, we help employees hold the line.

• Defending Your Performance Record: We help you document and present evidence that your "essential functions" were met (or exceeded) while teleworking, making it legally difficult for the agency to claim you must be in the office.

• Challenging "Bad Faith" Re-evaluations: If your agency is using the RTO mandate as a pretext to ignore your medical needs, we intervene to ensure the interactive process is followed according to the letter of the law.

• RA Reconsideration & Appeals: If your approved accommodation has been rescinded, we assist in drafting high-impact requests for reconsideration and, if necessary, formal EEO complaints.

• Medical Documentation Audit: We work with you to ensure your medical file is updated to withstand the "new scrutiny" agencies are applying in 2026.

Your health and your career shouldn't be a casualty of a policy shift. Contact InformedFED today for affordable assistance in securing your Reasonable Accommodation. See our public list of services and fees by clicking here.