was not given immediate access to a lactation room and was told that she had to wait three days for badge access. Fifth, Brinks told Ames that none of her work had been completed while she was on maternity leave, that she had to work overtime to get caught up, and that if she did not catch up, she would be disciplined. Sixth, Neel did nothing to assist Ames in finding a place to lactate and instead told Ames, “I think it’s best that you go home to be with your babies.” And seventh, at the time Ames resigned, it had been more than five hours since she had last expressed milk and she was in considerable physical pain. Nationwide’s several attempts to accommodate Ames show its intent to maintain an employment relationship with Ames, not force her to quit. See Fercello, 612 F.3d at 1083 (<HOLDING>). Although Nationwide incorrectly calculated
holding that the employers willingness to accommodate the employee undercut the employees claim of constructive discharge holding the claim of constructive discharge does not accrue until an employee resigns holding employers initial refusal to accommodate employees medical restrictions insufficient to establish adverse employment action holding that a failure to accommodate claim is separate and distinct from a claim of discriminatory treatment under the ada and pointing out that a failure to accommodate claim and a claim of discriminatory treatment under the ada are not like or reasonably related to one another and one cannot expect a failure to accommodate claim to develop from an investigation into a claim that an employee was terminated because of a disability recognizing that a constructive discharge claim and a hostile work environment claim are not equivalent because a constructive discharge claim imposes a higher standard