January 10, 2025 | San Francisco, CA — MedLegalNews.com — The Costco disability discrimination case has concluded with a federal court in California ruling in favor of Costco Wholesale Corp., dismissing a lawsuit brought by Margarita Zamora, a former employee who claimed wrongful termination and violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The case, Margarita Zamora v. Costco Wholesale Corp., was filed on January 3rd in the U.S. District Court for Northern California.
The court’s decision in the Costco disability discrimination case underscores the importance of clearly defining essential job functions and maintaining proper documentation during the accommodation process. It also highlights how courts evaluate employer compliance with FEHA when determining whether reasonable accommodations were provided. Legal experts note that this ruling reinforces the principle that while employers must engage in an interactive process, they are not required to create new positions or remove key duties that fundamentally alter a job’s nature.
Background of the Disability Discrimination Case
Zamora sustained a shoulder injury in March 2018 after falling off a ladder while working as a stocker at a Redwood City Costco warehouse. This injury significantly limited her ability to lift, pull, or push more than 10 pounds, effectively preventing her from returning to her stocker duties.
Efforts to Accommodate Zamora
Disability Discrimination Case: Following surgery and other treatments, Zamora reached maximum medical improvement in August 2020. During a subsequent meeting with Costco officials, she proposed performing alternative tasks, such as cleaning or other modified duties. However, the court highlighted that FEHA does not require employers to create light-duty positions for disabled employees who are unable to fulfill essential job functions.
Court’s Findings
The court found that Costco had engaged in a good-faith interactive process to identify a suitable accommodation for Zamora’s disability. Despite exploring various options, including temporary assignments involving smaller items after her initial injury, no permanent position matched her medical restrictions. The court emphasized that Costco was not obligated to create a modified role that excluded essential job functions beyond Zamora’s physical capabilities.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the court concluded that “Costco reasonably accommodated Zamora to try and find vacant positions that would work with her medical restrictions” before terminating her employment in January 2021. The court’s decision to grant summary judgment to Costco underscores the company’s efforts to comply with FEHA regulations while balancing operational needs.
Read more here: U.S. District Court for Northern California
Stay informed about major employment law rulings and compliance updates. Subscribe to MedLegalNews.com for weekly insights into workplace litigation, DWC updates, and FEHA case developments.
🔗 Read More from MedLegalNews.com:
- DWC Now Accepting Applications for Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) Examination Scheduled for April 5-11
- DWC Enhances Online Education Modules for Workers’ Compensation Community
- Wildfire Smoke Alert: Cal/OSHA Urges Employers to Protect Workers from Unhealthy Air in Pacific Palisades
- Cal/OSHA Cites Safeway for Exposing Workers to Hazards at Largest Warehouse in Tracy
- CA Doctor to Plead Guilty to Conspiring with Attorney to Defraud SIBTF of $3 Million
FAQs: About the Costco Disability Discrimination Case
What was the Costco disability discrimination case about?
The Costco disability discrimination case involved former employee Margarita Zamora, who alleged wrongful termination and FEHA violations after a workplace injury.
How did Costco respond in the disability discrimination case?
Costco showed that it engaged in a good-faith interactive process to accommodate Zamora’s medical restrictions and explored multiple modified duty options before termination.
What did the court decide in the Costco disability discrimination case?
The court ruled in favor of Costco, concluding that FEHA does not require employers to create new positions or remove essential job duties to accommodate an employee.
What can employers learn from the Costco disability discrimination case?
Employers should document all accommodation efforts, maintain communication with employees, and ensure compliance with FEHA to reduce legal risk.