Employment civil rights laws require employers to make reasonable accommodations for certain workers so that they can perform their jobs. The “reasonableness” of an accommodation request should be based largely on the cost of the accommodation relative to the company's resources, but how do people really evaluate such requests? This study examines determinations of the reasonableness of workplace accommodation requests made by trial judges and ordinary people. Using a 2 × 3 × 3 between‐subjects factorial design, we test the effect of worker identity (nursing‐mother worker, transgender worker, and Muslim worker) and cost on determinations of reasonableness. We find that (1) the identity category of the requesting worker impacts determinations of reasonableness by both judges and laypeople, (2) the cost of the accommodation impacts determinations of reasonableness, (3) judges are more likely to think that accommodation requests are reasonable than are laypeople, (4) there is a complicated relationship between accommodation cost and employee identity, and (5) the cost of the requested accommodation mitigates the effect of identity significantly for judges but less so for ordinary citizens. While judges are less influenced by the identity category of the employee‐requestor than are their lay‐counterparts, social status plays a role in determining what constitutes “reasonable accommodation.”

中文翻译：

---

应得的工人：法官和外行关于工作场所住宿的决定

《就业民权法》要求雇主为某些工人提供合理的住所，以便他们可以从事工作。调解请求的“合理性”应主要基于调解相对于公司资源的成本，但是人们如何真正评估此类请求呢？这项研究调查了法官和普通人对工作场所住宿要求合理性的确定。使用2×3×3的受试者间析因设计，我们测试了工人身份（护理母亲，跨性别工人和穆斯林工人）和成本对合理性确定的影响。我们发现（1）请求工人的身份类别会影响法官和非专业人员的合理性确定，（2）住宿费用会影响合理性的确定；（3）法官比外行人士更倾向于认为住宿要求合理；（4）住宿费用与员工身份之间存在复杂的关系；（5）所要求的住宿费用大大减轻了法官的身份影响，但对普通公民却没有那么大。尽管法官受雇员要求者身份类别的影响要比其同业较少，但社会地位在确定什么构成“合理的住宿条件”方面发挥着作用。（5）所要求的住宿费用大大减轻了法官的身份影响，但对普通公民却没有那么大。尽管法官受雇员要求者身份类别的影响要比其同业较少，但社会地位在确定什么构成“合理的住宿条件”方面发挥着作用。（5）所要求的住宿费用大大减轻了法官的身份影响，但对普通公民却没有那么大。尽管法官受雇员要求者身份类别的影响要比其同业较少，但社会地位在确定什么构成“合理的住宿条件”方面发挥着作用。