Filing a disability accommodation discrimination claim in Texas

It may not have occurred to you to frame this legally. In plain terms: you asked for a reasonable adjustment for your condition — and got brushed aside, or shown the door.

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 Texas it's prohibited by the state Human Rights Law; federally, by The Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Texas route: TWC-CRD

In Texas, a disability accommodation discrimination charge is filed with Texas Workforce Commission — Civil Rights Division (TWC-CRD), 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 300 days of the discriminatory act, and the law applies to employers with 15+. Where state representation is permitted, this is the route Thurgood works through for employees in Texas.

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 TWC-CRD typically maintain a work-sharing agreement, so one charge can be cross-filed.

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.

Texas — TWC-CRD

1. You file a verified complaint with Texas Workforce Commission — Civil Rights Division (TWC-CRD).
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.

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.

The contrast that's easy to miss: TWC-CRD can hold a hearing and order a remedy itself, while the EEOC investigates and conciliates but generally needs a court to force one. That's a real reason the state route can matter in Texas.

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). Texas'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.

Case outcomes turn on the particular facts, and no result can be promised.

Recent Texas changes

Texas’s disability-accommodation duty runs largely in step with the federal ADA.

• State law mirrors the ADA Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code (the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act) tracks the ADA’s reasonable-accommodation requirement and is enforced by the Texas Workforce Commission’s Civil Rights Division. Like the ADA, it applies to employers with 15 or more employees, so the state and federal accommodation standards largely move together. Texas Workforce Commission →
• Watch the deadline A charge under the state law generally must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory act, while the federal EEOC route allows 300 days in Texas — so the date of the act is the key thing to track.

Texas outcomes worth knowing

• The Results Companies Individual $250,000 — At a Wichita Falls, Texas operation, the company refused to provide screen-reader technology a blind employee needed to do the job, offering only generalized claims of hardship. It paid $250,000 under a consent decree and agreed to a plan for handling future screen-reader requests. EEOC newsroom →
• Baker Concrete Construction Individual $58,000 — A nine-year payroll manager in Houston with asthma asked to work from home for a period after a bad reaction to construction dust in the office. Instead of allowing the temporary telework, the company fired her. It paid $58,000 and agreed to permit telework as an accommodation where appropriate. EEOC newsroom →

How Thurgood represents you

Thurgood appears for employees before federal agencies across the country, and before state agencies wherever it’s allowed. A trained non-attorney representative — your Authorized Justice Practitioner — documents the evidence and timeline, files the formal charge, and sees 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 your situation qualifies, you’ll be offered a free consultation with an associate who can represent your claim.

Frequently asked questions