Here are seven things that every employer should know.
The Americans with Disabilities Act has been law since 1992, and the rules regarding medical inquiries for applicants and employees have not changed much since that time. However, many employers are still confused about what they can and cannot do. These seven tips may make things easier.
No. 1: You can't ask for medical information from applicants. Period. The most you can do at the applicant stage is ask something like, "Do you believe you can perform this position with or without a reasonable accommodation?" And the answer should be "Yes/No/Not Sure." Do not follow up with a question about what, if any, reasonable accommodations the applicant will need. (But don't worry - you will be able to get that information later.)
No. 2: You can ask a question of an applicant that could, conceivably, elicit an answer that discloses the applicant's disability, as long as the question is not likely to have that effect. For example, you can ask, "How many days were you absent from work in the past year?" You can even request an explanation. That's because employees miss work for all kinds of reasons having nothing to do with disabilities. And even if an applicant volunteers, "I missed 90 days this year because I was undergoing chemotherapy," you still haven't violated the ADA because your original question was not likely to elicit information about a disability.
On the other hand, it would violate the ADA for you to ask an applicant "How many days did you miss work in the past year because of illness?" Because this question focuses on medically-related absences, it is likely to elicit information about an applicant's disability.
No. 3: Once you've made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant, you can ask just about anything, as long as you ask the same questions of every offeree in that job category. Post-offer is the stage where you can do it all (almost) -- you can send everyone for a post-offer physical or psychological examination, ask them about any medical conditions they've ever had, test them for drugs or alcohol, ask about prior workers' compensation injuries, ask them whether they need reasonable accommodations, etc., etc.
If the post-offer medical examination indicates that the offeree has a condition that might require accommodation or might disqualify the offeree from working at the job, you can send just that one offeree for individualized follow-up assessment as appropriate. We'll call this "phase 2" of the post-offer medical examination. Any "phase 2" medical examination should be limited to the job-related medical condition. For example, if "phase 1" revealed that the offeree had a bad back, "phase 2" should be limited to the bad back -- determining what the back problem is, how severe it is, whether the offeree can perform the job with that condition, and whether the employer can make reasonable accommodations that would allow the offeree to perform the job. If the "phase 2" examination goes beyond that narrow scope -- for example, if it's a complete physical -- then it violates the ADA.
CAUTION: With all post-offer medical examinations, be sure that you comply with the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Under the GINA, your physicians should not be doing DNA testing, obtaining other genetic information, or even asking offerees for their family medical history. Be sure that the paperwork you give to the doctor contains the GINA "safe harbor" language, which can give you a defense if the doctor slips up and asks the offeree how many people in her family have died of heart attacks. Here's the language:
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) prohibits employers and other entities covered by GINA Title II from requesting or requiring genetic information of an individual or family member of the individual, except as specifically allowed by this law. To comply with this law, we are asking that you not provide any genetic information when responding to this request for medical information. "Genetic information," as defined by GINA, includes an individual's family medical history, the results of an individual's or family member's genetic tests, the fact that an individual or an individual's family member sought or received genetic services, and genetic information of a fetus carried by an individual or an individual's family member or an embryo lawfully held by an individual or family member receiving assistive reproductive services.
Copy and paste to your heart's content!
No. 4: A drug test isn't technically a "medical examination" under the ADA. Who knew? For that reason, a drug test can theoretically be performed at any time. There's only one problem: a good drug test will have to include questions about lawful medications the applicant (or employee) is taking that might affect the results of the test. The questions about lawful medications are a "medical examination" for ADA purposes. That's why employers postpone drug tests until the post-offer stage.
Alcohol testing is always a "medical examination" for ADA purposes and must always comply with all ADA requirements.
No. 5: Once your offerees begin employment, you can no longer require any kind of "preventive" medical examinations. You can make medical inquiries and require medical examinations of current employees only if the inquiries or exams are "job-related and consistent with business necessity." (You can also require medical examinations if they are required by another federal law, or in conjunction with a voluntary wellness program.)
Generally, this means that you can't make medical inquiries of current employees unless you become aware that a particular employee has a job-related issue that may be due to a medical condition. In that case, you can talk with the employee about the issue, and you can send the employee for assessment to his or her own doctor, or even to a doctor of your own choosing.
Even though questions about lawful medications are considered a "medical examination" under the ADA, it is all right to require employees to be tested randomly for illegal drug use. To avoid an ADA issue, you can either have a Medical Review Officer obtain the information about legal medications and withhold that information from the company, or you can postpone the questions about legal medications until after an employee tests positive (and not ask at all if the employee tests negative).
If you choose the MRO option, then the MRO should be instructed to tell the company only that the employee tested "negative" or "confirmed positive." If the employee tests positive but the MRO determines that legal medications could have caused the result, then the MRO should communicate to the company only that the employee tested "negative."
Alcohol testing of current employees can only be done "for cause" (including post-accident) unless random testing is required by another federal law.
No. 6: Speaking of which, watch out for those other federal "requirements"! If you are governed by another federal law, such as Department of Transportation regulations, or OSHA requirements, then you can comply with those, even if they conflict with your general ADA obligations. But be careful because these other federal laws aren't always as "strict" as we think. Also, beware if you're trying to go "beyond compliance." For example, you might think it would be a good idea to require machine operators to comply with DOT "preventive" medical examination requirements. The only problem is that DOT regulations don't apply to machine operators, which means that DOT requirements will not be a defense to your ADA violation. Also, beware of "industry standards" that aren't actually required by federal law. Industry standards are great, but they do not trump the ADA.
No. 7: If a medical examination of a current employee is job-related and consistent with business necessity, then you can send the employee to a physician (or other medical professional) of your choice. It's a good idea to start with the employee's doctor, and if his or her opinion seems legitimate, then go with it. But if you have reason to question the doctor's opinion, then you have the right to choose an appropriate specialist and send the employee to that doctor for further assessment. It can even be a doctor with whom your company already has a relationship.
Of course, it has to be at your expense.
If your doctor's opinion is different from the opinion of the employee's doctor, you can follow the recommendations of your doctor. There is no "second/third opinion" procedure under the ADA, as there is when determining whether an employee can take leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Once you get the information you need from the physicians, you have to engage in the interactive process with the employee and attempt to make reasonable accommodations. But those are topics for another day.
Image Credits: Doctor and "Drug Screen" sign from flickr, Creative Commons license.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010