ADA-Safety Issues

I have an employee with diabetes that works on a production oil platform. He just transferred to a job which he is more active in and apparently had a problem controlling his insulin. He became disoriented, and they had to remove him from the platform and take him to the hospital to get it under control. The doctor gave him a full release, but they do not want him back at the platform because they don't feel that he is safe to work with. The job that he was at before, he was not as active, and his co-workers apparently looked out for him. Just because the doctor released him does not really mean that he has this problem under control. How do we make sure we don't discriminate against him but also ensure the safety of the other employees?

Comments

  • 6 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-13-02 AT 03:54PM (CST)[/font][p]Do you do medical evaluations as part of the hiring process -- in other words for those physically demanding jobs, do you have a medical examination based upon the demands of the job (duties, and physcial, environmental and mental demands) to see if the employee can perform the job without undue risk to himself or others?

    The "undue risk", under ADA, has to be more than a potential. The issue is whether or not there is an imminent risk of danger to the employee or other if he returns to the "more active job" on the oil platform. Merely the fear that he may forget to take insulin isn't sufficient.

    If the employee's own physician released him, firstly make sure the doctor knows exactly what his duties are. Send him a job description listing the essential demands of the job including the phyusical, enviornmental and mental demands. Make sure the doctor has full information. If you get something back that says "okay to work this job", then talk to the employee and make sure that he understands about not repeating the cause of the earlier problem. Or send for another doctor's evaluation -- one who does the occupational health exams and get a second opinion -- if you are not comfortable with the treating practitioner's clearance.

    Short of that, you really can't do much. Again, merely having diabetes and a "potential" risk that the employee may miss an insulin injection is insufficient. But you could have his supervisor to make sure with him that he took his insulin -- or to have a personal reminder notice. That maybe something the employee would be willing to go with.

    Is the employee asking for any resonable accommodation? Diabetes has been held to be a qualifying disability under ADA -- but whether it is for this emplyee would have to be made on the specifics of his situation, if he is asking for reasonable accommodation.

  • Good advice, Hatchetman.

    James Sokolowski
    Senior Editor
    M. Lee Smith Publishers
  • We have a situation that is much like this- this person is a security officer who just got promoted to work as a security officer in a courthouse. As a result, he will now be req'd to carry a gun. He has a previous epilepsy condition that years ago, resulted in his dr. initiating the process where he lost his license for awhile, due to seizures. This apparently has been under control for some time as has gotten his driver's license back. Since we had previous knowledge of his condition, and we had to restrict his driving our vehicles, should we get a statement from his physician that he is not a threat to himself or others? There is no evidence that his epilepsy is causing any problems at this time. It must be being controlled well bymedication. His supervisor has not discussed this at all with him for fear of legal problems.
    Thanks for your help!
  • When you returned him to his usual duties, that was the time to get from his doctor a full release statement. I recommend never, ever returning a person to work or removing restrictions in the absence of a statement satisfactory to you from his physician, releasing him or removing the restrictions. If time has passed, and you did not do that at that time, I would not suggest you now do it. It might be viewed as harassment by some. You say things are going well and there seems to be no problem. Therefore, a requirement for a statement would serve to suggest that the employer assumes there IS a problem. I recommend not requiring a statement at this time. He seems to have it under control.


  • at the time of appointment, some one who carries a gun in public as part of his or her duties, I have always felt, should not only have a medical examination to make sure of the ability to executive those duties, but a psychological examination to make sure that the indiviudal has the mental ability to work in dfficult situation with automatic reliance on the gun.


    The real question is, do you give any type of psychological exam to any of your employees assigned to carry a weapon and ability to use it in public? I assume you are a public sector emplyer, either city or county.
  • Hatchetman: Am I on the wrong channel? Where are you getting this stuff about psychological testing for gun toters?
Sign In or Register to comment.