[zuminator]

If the issue led to termination it's at least conceivable that it's a little more complicated than the staffer is letting on. If the person took six 5-minute breaks and got their tasks accomplished, no problem. But if they took 6 20-minute bathroom breaks, that's 2 hours out of a day in the bathroom, on a daily basis. That's an employee who's away from their workstation fully 1/4 of their day. Are they really able to fulfill their responsibilities. Are they sincerely trying to fulfill their responsibilities?

While most people who have chronic conditions are absolutely willing and able to perform up to task if given a reasonable accommodation, in some cases it's staggeringly apparent that the employee has no intention of ever putting in a full day's work, and is using the claim of an illness as a shield while they coast through the day. Manage a large enough number of people and you will inevitably come across such types on rare occasion.

[risedotmoe]

As someone who’s dealt with this exact situation, someone with a “bowel issue” likely doesn’t take 5 minute poops unless they have diarrhea. 20 minutes is about normal when you’re constipated but have to poop 5 times a day. If you don’t go to the bathroom you’re in pain and unfocused until you poop and until you’re done pooping. What’s spent in those 20 minutes? Dreading people will say exactly what you just said while dealing with your very real but very embarrassing chronic illness. Can’t hold a job down but can’t qualify for disability. Luckily I’ve made strides in my health that I don’t live that hell anymore but not everyone is that lucky.

[threatofrain]

Why does this not qualify for disability?

[risedotmoe]

Because you are physically able to do the work. You might be able to get it approved in some areas and you might not. Some people with IBS go almost unnoticed while others it can be debilitating. You can't blanket the disorder as a disability because its a case by case basis.

[antisthenes]

> While most people who have chronic conditions are absolutely willing and able to perform up to task if given a reasonable accommodation, in some cases it's staggeringly apparent that the employee has no intention of ever putting in a full day's work, and is using the claim of an illness as a shield while they coast through the day.

So what? Reasonable accommodation has to include things like this, or the flexibility for the employee to work an extra hour and finish up their duties for the time they missed.

Otherwise, it's not accommodation at all.

And the idea that they're "coasting" when they're working 75% of the time is absolutely ludicrous. Does that mean French workers are all coasting, because they have a 7-hour work day?

[opencl]

When I worked at one of these warehouses, anything over 30 minutes per day of 'time off task' out of a 10 hour shift was supposed to get you written up. Time off task being defined as any period greater than 5 minutes without doing work that the computer tracked.