The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sued payroll software firm Paycom, alleging the company dismissed an employee who suffered repeated anaphylactic reactions to onions brought into the office instead of granting meaningful protections. The case raises immediate questions about how employers must respond when a workplace hazard can be life threatening.
The suit, filed in federal court in Oklahoma City on July 1, 2026, says Paycom failed to provide legally required reasonable accommodations after an employee disclosed a severe onion allergy and submitted medical documentation. According to the complaint, temporary fixes were offered but remote work or a truly isolated workspace was denied.
Company documents and the filing outline multiple on-site exposures. The employee, identified in the suit as Katie Jorgenson, began at Paycom in late May 2024. Within days she reported smelling onions near her desk and suffered anaphylactic reactions that required emergency treatment on two occasions.
Indigenous women changemakers win inaugural Braided Matriarch awards
Arbuckle Wilderness operating license pulled: Oklahoma cites violations, park ordered closed
After providing a doctor’s note urging an enclosed office or the ability to work from home, Jorgenson was moved to a less-populated room but still near a staff breakroom where food was commonly eaten. The EEOC says the relocation did not prevent further exposures; the most serious reaction occurred in June 2024. The next day, the complaint alleges, Paycom terminated her employment on the grounds that it could not accommodate her condition.
- What the EEOC is asking the court to do:
- Impose a permanent injunction preventing the employer from refusing a qualified person an accommodation needed to do the job.
- Order Paycom to adopt policies and training that ensure equal employment opportunities for people with disabilities.
- Award back pay, damages and other relief to the employee.
- Employee’s documented requests: an enclosed office away from food sources or permission to work remotely; medical records were provided to HR.
- Company response, per the complaint: temporary scheduling and workspace changes, a mask recommendation and advice to carry an EpiPen, but no long-term remote work approval and no officewide notice about food with onions.
Paycom issued a brief statement to local media saying it follows applicable federal, state and local laws and is committed to employee well-being, but declined to comment on ongoing litigation. The EEOC’s lawyer emphasized employers’ legal duty to accommodate disabilities, particularly where refusal could expose workers to life-threatening harm.
The case centers on the intersection of workplace safety and disability rights under federal law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act and related equal-employment statutes. Legal experts say the outcome could clarify how far employers must go to mitigate environmental risks that stem from coworkers’ behavior — for example, food brought into shared spaces.
Practical stakes for employers include reassessing office layouts, remote-work policies and communication protocols about shared eating areas. Simple steps — such as designated eating zones, written accommodation procedures, or allowing remote work when medical evidence supports it — can prevent both health incidents and legal exposure.
For employees, the case highlights the importance of documenting medical conditions and accommodation requests in writing and escalating concerns if initial adjustments prove inadequate.
The lawsuit remains pending. Paycom, the EEOC and the employee are now asking the court to resolve whether the company’s actions met legal obligations — a decision that could influence employer practices nationwide.
