Fitness for Duty Warning Signs

Last week, I had the pleasure of speaking with hundreds of occupational health professionals – doctors, nurses, and administrators about return-to-work policies.  We had 90 minutes.  We could have chatted for three hours, we got so many questions!

These health care professionals were most concerned about the scope of their fitness for duty examinations for good reason.  They wanted to know that they were doing the right thing.  Some companies have fitness for duty examinations for all employees returning from leave.  Some rarely do unless they have a particular concern about a particular condition or particular employee.  Our message to them was this:  Fitness for duty exams are sticky legal wickets all the time.  Health care professionals and employers have to be careful when they require such exams and what they examine.  Below are some tips.  If you don’t have the Department of Labor’s

Below are some tips about fitness for duty exams.  If you don’t have the Department of Labor’s FMLA Employer Guide, get it, print it, put it where you can find it. Even if you’re not subject to the FMLA, this is a good resource when an employee returns to work.

When an employee is returning to work from leave, you only get to ask about what put the employee on leave. The return to work is not permission to examine everything about the employee.  You only get to look at what put the employee on leave and only if you have a reasonable belief that the employee’s current ability to perform the essential functions of the job are impaired by the medical condition or the employee poses a direct threat to the organization.

Here’s an example:  Jamal works as a laborer on a construction worksite.  He broke his arm a few weeks ago.  He is ready to return to work.  You can ask for medical documentation from his health care provider that Jamal can return to work with or without accommodations if you are concerned that Jamal may be weaker, could cause injury to his co-workers, and the position requires him to lift 50 pounds regularly.  You don’t get to require Jamal to undergo a blood and urine test.  The scope is limited to his ability to use his arm to perform the essential functions of his job.

One more example:  Jenny works as a marketing executive.  She has been out on FMLA after having a baby.  The birth did not go well, and the baby was in the hospital for several weeks.  You are concerned that Jenny might not be “all there” after this ordeal even though everyone is healthy now.  You cannot ask for a fitness for duty examination related to Jenny’s mental health unless you have some evidence – more than your gut feeling or even rumors – that Jenny is a direct threat or unable to do her job.   Of course, if you later get evidence when she returns, you can ask for such an examination.

If you do fitness for duty, do them consistently. Employers should give fitness for duty examinations on a consistent basis for similarly situated employees.  It makes sense to have a fitness for duty examination for everyone who has a heart attack who works on a production floor.  If you do such an exam for everyone who has a heart attack regardless of their position, this may be a bit more questionable.  Your receptionist who has a heart attack probably does not need a fitness for duty examination.

“Walking work comp claims” do exist, but this doesn’t mean you can always intervene or terminate. Most employers at some point in their business life have had an employee who is a danger to himself primarily because they are klutzy.  They break their arms, cause workplace accidents, and have racked up some hefty work comp benefits.  But these facts do not necessarily mean you get to put the employee through a thorough medical examination.  These facts don’t support extreme changes to his position because he is klutzy.  Your job is to try to make the worksite as safe as you can and train the employee and others to be safe.  Prescribing health care won’t do it.  You must have facts to support a reasonable belief that the employee is a direct threat to himself or others before you can force an examination.

Returning employees to work after an illness or injury can be a legal minefield.  At play are the Family Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, workers’ compensation laws, and a myriad of state and local laws on top.  Certification forms, injury reports, calculating leave time, benefits – it all gets complicated.  It is downright frightening for the unwary trying to do the best thing for the employee and the organization.  When this happens to your organization, find the right resources and be sure to ask lots of questions.

Time to Put Away the Blankets

 

Spring has most definitely sprung.  It’s almost summer!  We don’t need extra blankets on our beds anymore!  While blankets keep us warm and make us feel safe in a cold world, blanket policies are dangerous and in at least three occasions, they’re downright unlawful.  So while we’re packing up the extra down comforter, let’s look at packing up these three blanket policies too.

  1. All employees with XYZ medical conditions can’t do XYZ job. A heart attack is a big deal, but not all heart attacks are the same.  Some mean stents that do not stop driving while others require open heart surgery that lay the victim up for months.  Having a blanket policy that prohibits all heart attack victims from doing a certain job denies employees the opportunity to explain their own condition and engage in the interactive process the ADA demands.  While it’s true that some conditions will disqualify employees every time, do the individualized process for each employee who presents with the condition.
  1. We don’t employ felons. Employers conduct criminal background checks for all sorts of reasons – reducing workplace violence, reducing the risk of negligent hiring, etc.  The temptation exists to not hire anyone with a felony.  However, the EEOC takes issue with this given the number of incarcerated minorities.  Just like the medical conditions, the EEOC requires employers to do an individualized assessment of whether an individual with a felony conviction should be hired.  This analysis involves the Green factors: 1) the nature of the job, 2) the nature of the conviction, and 3) the time between the crime (or end of incarceration) and application.  While it may be true that you’re never going to hire an accountant with an embezzlement conviction, deal with this on a case-by-case basis.
  1. We can never accommodate a level beyond the FMLA-mandated 12 weeks. The EEOC has litigated this issue several times.  With the ValleyLife case and guidance issued last May, the EEOC has tried to make the point that employers must engage in the interactive process after FMLA to determine if the employee needs even more leave.  Employees have to show a need for the leave, but a hardline cutoff will get an employer in trouble.

The EEOC wants employers to treat employees and applicants like the individuals they are, talking with them about their individual circumstances and needs before dismissing those circumstances and needs summarily.  Dealing directly with these is sometimes hard, it may mean an employer takes a chance on someone in close cases, and it means we leave the comfort of that blanket policy.  But, it’s spring now.  We don’t need the blanket.

Image by Kelly Sikkema from unsplash.com