Which statement best describes the relationship between reasonable accommodations and undue hardship?

Which statement best describes the relationship between reasonable accommodations and undue hardship?

• A. If it imposes any cost, it is not reasonable
• B. It must be the cheapest possible option
• C. An accommodation is reasonable if it does not cause undue hardship; if it would cause undue hardship, it is not required
• D. Accommodations are always required regardless of cost

Answer: (C)

The main idea here is how reasonable accommodations are tied to undue hardship: an accommodation should be provided if it can be done without causing undue hardship, but it isn’t required if it would create undue hardship for the organization. Undue hardship means more than a little extra effort—it’s a significant difficulty or expense relative to the employer’s resources, including factors like the size of the business, budget, the number of employees, the type of operation, and potential safety or disruption concerns. So an accommodation isn’t ruled out simply because it costs something; it’s weighed against whether that cost or impact is too substantial for the particular setting. If an accommodation would not cause undue hardship, it should be provided; if it would cause undue hardship, it isn’t required. That’s why the correct statement is that an accommodation is reasonable if it does not cause undue hardship; if it would cause undue hardship, it is not required. The other options misstate the relationship by tying reasonableness strictly to cost or insisting accommodations must always be the cheapest option or always required regardless of cost.

The main idea here is how reasonable accommodations are tied to undue hardship: an accommodation should be provided if it can be done without causing undue hardship, but it isn’t required if it would create undue hardship for the organization.

Undue hardship means more than a little extra effort—it’s a significant difficulty or expense relative to the employer’s resources, including factors like the size of the business, budget, the number of employees, the type of operation, and potential safety or disruption concerns. So an accommodation isn’t ruled out simply because it costs something; it’s weighed against whether that cost or impact is too substantial for the particular setting. If an accommodation would not cause undue hardship, it should be provided; if it would cause undue hardship, it isn’t required.

That’s why the correct statement is that an accommodation is reasonable if it does not cause undue hardship; if it would cause undue hardship, it is not required. The other options misstate the relationship by tying reasonableness strictly to cost or insisting accommodations must always be the cheapest option or always required regardless of cost.