Filing a disability accommodation discrimination claim in Montana

Right now, this probably doesn't feel like a legal matter. You're thinking: you requested an adjustment so you could keep doing your job with your condition — and it was ignored, or it ended in termination.

What this actually looks like

Most people don't walk in calling it “disability accommodation discrimination.” They describe a situation:

• You asked for a schedule change, a piece of equipment, a transfer, or remote work for a medical condition — and got no real response.
• No one ever sat down with you to talk options through; the request just died.
• You were told “we don't do that here” instead of any look at whether it was workable.
• Discipline or termination followed soon after you made the request.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, an employer with 15 or more workers must engage in an interactive process and provide a reasonable accommodation for a known disability — unless it is a genuine undue hardship — and cannot retaliate against you for requesting one or for the employer's own refusal to engage. In Montana it's prohibited by the state Human Rights Law; federally, by The Americans with Disabilities Act.

The federal route: the EEOC

The same conduct can be filed federally with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The federal filing deadline is generally 180–300 days where a state agency exists, and the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to employers with 15+ employees. The EEOC and HRB typically maintain a work-sharing agreement, so one charge can be cross-filed.

Thurgood's representation before the EEOC is nationwide, so for employees in Montana the federal charge is typically the lead route.

The Montana route: HRB

In Montana, a disability accommodation discrimination charge is filed with Human Rights Bureau (Montana DLI) (HRB), which enforces the state Human Rights Law. The agency investigates and may attempt conciliation or hold a hearing. A complaint generally must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act, and the law applies to employers with 1+. Where state representation is permitted, this is the route Thurgood works through for employees in Montana.

The statutes & deadlines

Both systems prohibit the same core conduct and protect against retaliation. Here are the specific provisions and the clocks that run on each.

What happens after you file

A charge isn't a lawsuit, and it doesn't go straight to a judge. Both agencies run an investigation first — but they end differently, and that difference is easy to miss.

Federal — EEOC

1. You file a charge with the EEOC.
2. The EEOC notifies the employer, which submits a position statement.
3. The EEOC investigates and often offers mediation.
4. It issues a cause / no-cause determination and attempts conciliation.
5. To compel relief, the case goes to court — the EEOC can sue, or issue a right-to-sue letter so the worker can.

Montana — HRB

1. You file a verified complaint with Human Rights Bureau (Montana DLI) (HRB).
2. The agency notifies the employer and investigates — records, witnesses, position statements.
3. It issues a determination, often a probable-cause finding; many matters settle through conciliation along the way.
4. Depending on the state, the agency may hold a hearing before an administrative law judge, or issue a determination and a notice of right to sue.
5. Where it holds a hearing, the agency can order relief directly — back pay, damages, reinstatement, civil penalties — without a separate lawsuit.

The contrast that's easy to miss: the EEOC investigates and conciliates, but compelling relief generally takes a court. In Montana, the federal charge is the route Thurgood works through.

Examples of what can make a disability claim hold up

Strong claims are rarely built on a single overheard comment. They're built on quieter evidence an investigator can test. Examples of what can carry a claim:

• The request. A concrete accommodation you asked for — in writing where possible — frames the claim; the ADA expects the employer to respond and explore options, not ignore it.
• The interactive process that never happened. An employer's refusal to discuss alternatives at all is itself evidence; the law requires a good-faith, interactive exchange.
• Feasibility and comparators. Accommodations the employer granted others, or the low cost and easy logistics of what you asked for, undercut an “undue hardship” defense.
• Timing. Discipline or termination close on the heels of the request supports the retaliation claim.

What you can recover

Remedies generally fall into a few buckets — lost pay, money for the harm itself, and orders that change what the employer does. Under the federal damages-cap framework (shared by Title VII, the ADA, and the PWFA), only compensatory and punitive damages combined are capped, scaling with employer size; back pay, front pay, interest, and attorney's fees sit outside the cap (front pay confirmed uncapped in Pollard v. DuPont; attorney's fees for a prevailing employee). Montana's own limits differ — the table separates them.

State damages limits vary; confirm against the current statute. Back pay and front pay are wage-based relief and fall outside these caps where available.

Results rest on the facts of the case, and no one can promise what yours will bring.

How Thurgood represents you

Thurgood stands in for employees before federal agencies in every state, and before state agencies that allow representation. Working as a trained non-attorney representative, your Authorized Justice Practitioner builds the timeline and evidence, puts together the formal charge, and carries you through the agency process, from employer outreach through investigation and any hearing. You can start a free evaluation using Thurgood’s CaseFile AI — if it’s a fit, you’ll be offered a free consultation with an associate who can represent your claim.

Frequently asked questions