When an employee sues her employer under Gov. Code 12940(n) for failing to engage in an interactive process concerning making a reasonable accommodation for the employee’s disability, the employee need not suggest a possible accommodation to begin the process, but must, by the time of trial, be able to show that a reasonable accommodation existed at the time the employer should have begun the interactive process.  Here, plaintiff showed that accommodation for her carpal tunnel syndrome may have been possible, but she didn’t show that there was any reasonable accommodation available after she later suffered a shoulder injury.  Since the trial court had refused defendant’s proposed instruction on plaintiff’s burden of proving a reasonable accommodation existed, and since the jury verdict in plaintiff’s favor did not distinguish between the wrist and the shoulder injuries, the judgment in plaintiff’s favor had to be reversed for retrial solely regarding failure to accommodate the wrist injury.  The decision also holds that the FEHA claim is not preempted by the Workers Compensation Act since it addressed a different subject, discrimination against the disabled, not compensation for the initial injury that rendered the employee disabled.