Privacy Vs Assistance

In trying to teach supervisors about various HR law in both interviewing prospective and current employees, we have told them that they should not ask about health problems, offer medical advice, and in general the less they know about employee medical conditons, the better.

We have a very good employee who is outgoing, talks alot, and mentions (to all who will listen, especially when he is feeling bad) that he has diabetes, and knows he should go to the doctor more, etc. In the past, when he was really sick, he had been told that he should go to the doctor. This was not said as a business requirement, but more of a friendly, concerned suggestion with no followup or enforcement at all. After a training course on ADA, knowing we had made these comments, we talked to our lawyer and he said when this occurs with him or anyone else, don't say anything to be safe. Just leave it alone for him / them to handle with no comment.

Yesterday at work, he became dizzy and weak and needed to sit down. A supervisor was with him as well as another employee. The employee asked him if he needed crackers or something to eat, and the supervisor stopped and said you can't ask that. She asked a few minutes later if he needed a Coke or something to drink, and he said (somewhat forcefully I'm told) that she is not allowed to ask that.

I've got to explain to all the distinction between respecting privacy and offering assistance to an ill employee. It seems like it should be common sense, but common sense is not always legal! Thanks for any and all advice.

Comments

  • 9 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I don't see anything wrong with offering that type of assistance. There's nothing wrong with assisting the person to a seat or in asking if they would like crackers or something to drink. None of those things are making reference to diabetes. It's not like you're offering to inject an insulin needle. The supervisor's fear of discrimination under ADA is overboard.

  • There is a lot of difference between offering this kind of assistance and inquiring into diagnosis. The legal advice which you received is an example of the very conservative, take no risk approach - which is their role. We listen to that and then decide if it fits a particular circumstance and in this case, it doesn't.
  • Kathy,

    The situation you have described sounds more like first-aid than meddling/trafficking in an employee's protected health information. It would be tempting to ask the overzealous supervisor what he would do if one of his employees had stopped breathing or was bleeding to death.

    Geno
  • Look, at some point there has to be practical consideration for the health and well-being of you fellow EEs.

    A couple of points to make, first of all, you cannot ask about health conditions, but that does not mean you have to pretend you did not hear or remember when the EE volunteers information about his/her condition.

    Second, a concerned person possessing the volunterred information is not precluded from offering assistance.

    Does anyone know about the "Good Samaritan Laws?"

    In the olden days, after people had tried to save people from drowning, some lawsuits ensued holding the would be savior liable. Good samaritan laws followed the protected one when make a bona fide effort. I don't know much more than that at this point, but perhaps this kind of spin can come into play here.
  • For any employee who becomes ill at work, I would hope someone would offer some kind of assistance - a chair, glass of water, etc. It is also common for someone to offer a drink or food; those offers are not related to any specific medical condition. If someone knows that a certain kind of food might help or be preferred, so be it. It would not violate the ADA or HIPAA privacy rules. Asking "Are you having a diabetic attack/seizure?" might, if the information is not volunteered by the employee.
  • In this instance the employee has self-disclosed to anyone within earshot that he has a medical problem. His coworkers apparently know what he needs when he has these spells. They are offering assistance of a first-aid variety, as has been stated in a previous post. I don't see the problem.

    If we continue to use the lawyer's ultra-conservative approach, we'll have stricken employees trying to communicate that they need help using hand signals and charades!







  • Does the EE wear one of the Medalert bracelets?

    That might help.
  • No, he does not wear a medic alert bracelet.
  • Thanks to all who offered suggestions. We had our quarterly meeting today, and I discussed the Good Samaritan law and legal liability for first aid / medical assistance. I found an article that suggested the following rules of thumb for offering to assist an ill employee without crossing the line: if the assistance offered is low tech (bandaids, tylenol, drinks, etc.), if the ill employee is able to refuse the assistance, and if the helper does not inquire for medical info not offered by the ill employee, the assistance they offer is fine. I don't think the supervisor completely agreed with me, but the topic was addressed. Thanks again. Kathy
Sign In or Register to comment.