SHRM offered senior specialist role in June 2024, revoked it a month later over employee’s request to bring medical service dog to work; court orders HR giant to pay $400,000

A jury on Friday found the United States' largest HR group liable for mishandling a job applicant's request for a disability accommodation, reported Business Insider. The Society for Human Resource Management, or SHRM, lost on all counts and was hit with a verdict of $400,000 in compensatory damages for failing to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Virginia Human Rights Act.

No punitive damages were awarded. The case was tried in Alexandria, Virginia, where SHRM is headquartered.

In a statement posted on SHRM's website, the HR group said it disagrees with the jury's verdict and will evaluate appellate options.


Read more: US declares power grid emergency across 13 states: What it means for residents

What happened?

In the complaint, plaintiff Fiona Torres alleged that SHRM offered her a role as a senior specialist in its product management department in June 2024, then revoked the offer that July because she wanted to bring her medical service dog to work, according to Business Insider.

Read more: Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan pay $57 million for 16,000-square-foot Gothic-style Strancally Castle in Ireland’s County Waterford

She said she is diabetic and that her dog could detect changes in her blood-sugar levels faster and more reliably than a top-tier glucose monitor.

SHRM says it offered alternative accommodations for diabetes management

SHRM responded in a January court filing, saying it offered Torres "multiple accommodations," including the ability to use her continuous glucose monitoring system and an insulin pump at work, to take breaks as needed to check her blood sugar levels, and to consume food or drink as needed at or near her workstation.

SHRM says verdict could have implications beyond the organisation

"This case carries implications well beyond SHRM," the group wrote. "If today's verdict becomes precedent for the principle that an employer must always capitulate to an employee's exact preferred accommodation, the interactive process the ADA was built around ceases to function. We are evaluating all appellate options to protect not just our own position, but the operational rights of HR departments and employers nationwide."

Plaintiff's lawyer says employers must consider workers' actual needs

Mary Kuntz, a lawyer for the plaintiff, praised the verdict in a statement.

"The law requires employers to look seriously at an employee's actual needs when an accommodation is requested," she wrote. "That obligation applies to every employer, including the organization so many others rely on for guidance on these questions."

SHRM faces second employment-related lawsuit verdict in less than a year

The judgment marks the second time in less than a year that SHRM has been held liable in an employment-related lawsuit.

In December, a jury returned an $11.5 million verdict against SHRM, which sells HR certifications and offers training on best HR practices, in an unrelated race discrimination and retaliation case involving a former employee. SHRM has since appealed that decision.

SHRM has faced controversies over workplace policies and management comments

Last year, Business Insider reported that SHRM had been embroiled in various controversies. Those included an attendance policy that penalized workers who arrived a minute after 9 a.m.; a memo about a "conservative" dress code that banned sequins; and a companywide meeting in which SHRM CEO Johnny C. Taylor said some staffers were "entitled," "complacent," and "sloppy."