Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevinh | Hacker News Reader

> Ultimately, each company has to make its own decision about whether to prioritize those who are allergic to pets or those who wish to bring pets in the office. There are costs and benefits to each.

Ultimately, it's a question of whether they want to comply with the ADA or not when considering which to prioritize.

View on HN

Oh? Who's covered... the people with allergies, or the people who need a dog to work? I wasn't aware. Do you have any evidence for this?

Both. However, here we are talking about pet animals and not service animals.

    Under Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and virtually all state laws, a service animal is an animal that has been trained to perform work or tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability

and

    In both the ADA and Section 504, a person with a disability is someone who has a physical or mental impairment that seriously limits one or more major life activities, or who is regarded as having such impairments. Asthma and allergies are usually considered disabilities under the ADA

That raises an interesting question: suppose a business has one employee who needs a service dog and another who is allergic to dogs. Both individuals can be accomodated individually, but there is no realistic way to accommodate both without creating "undue hardship" to the business. Who wins priority?

This may be an unrealistic scenario, but it's at least an interesting hypothetical.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com