I wanted at least to break a little bit of ground before consulting

be more spesific

>>17364109

In what sense? At least from my amateur understanding, the question as to whether or not you can challenge the accommodations that are supposedly there to protect you isn't something that's come up too much in caselaw: It's all about whether or not the person really is disabled, and whether or not those accomodations are reasonable, because the assumption is that the disabled person wants as much as they can get, and the employer wants to do as little as possible, as opposed to my case where I want those accommodations removed and being treated like one of the boys.

Uh, anyone?

Just get a new job and don't tell anybody you're disabled if you can pass. We're not in a database they check or anything. If you can't pass for fully functional I dont see how a lawsuit will help but don't really know anything about it.

>>17364394
The problem is it would come up on a background check that includes medical issues, or hell, anyone talking to my current employer about me

I have Hansen's Disease, AKA leprosy. And while I'm not contagious, people tend to freak when they find out. My "accomodations" have a lot to do with physically isolating me and doing all my work via phone, fax, and e-mail.