Yasmin Saenz Prof: Nina Peterson ENG-W131 October 6th, 2012 EEOC Case – Disability Discrimination The case that I examined was found directly from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) website. It examines the Aurora Health Care facility, with locations in Wisconsin and Northern Illinois. The Minneapolis, WI location was sued by two individuals whom were wrongfully subjected to a full health examination prior to an official extension of an offer for employment. The company also decided against hiring both individuals based upon the health assessment.
Many things went wrong with this case in particular. First, the health facility had no rights to subject the potential candidates for a full health screening, without proposing any official offer for employment. They actually did just the opposite, and mandated to the individuals that if they were seeking to gain employment, the facility would need the health assessment prior to any full job offer. Secondly, per the documentation, one of the individuals disclosed his carpal tunnel syndrome throughout the interview process, yet did not mark it as a health condition.
In his defense, he had surgery to correct the carpal tunnel syndrome, but the health facility went out of their way to wrongfully access his health records disclosing the man’s previous condition. Nonetheless, the syndrome would not have affected the candidate’s work ethic or work load. The second individual in this case had a similar play of events as well. She was wrongfully not offered a position due to the fact of her not disclosing a medication that she had previsouly taken.
The woman had MS and at one point in her life was taking a narcotic medication that is prescribed to individuals to take during hours of sleep. She did not disclose the medication because it was not prescribed to her or in consumption for quite some time. The facility again, wrongfully accessed her previous medical records that documented the drug, and therefore denied the offer of employment. Common sense seems to dictate that it is wrong for anyone to view previous health records of any individual unless for legal or ife threating situations, yet the facility took it upon themselves to lie to the candidates about the extension of an offer and secretly examined their past medical histories to come to a conclusion. These findings challenge discrimination laws because again, federal law “allows employers to require applicants to undergo a medical examination once an offer has been made, and the company did not formally extend an offer to these individuals and even went a step further and accessed previous medical records to come to their conclusion of not hiring both individuals.
Aurora Health Care Clinic concluded to not hiring the individuals on the basis of them not disclosing this information about themselves. The case is currently posted on the EEOC webpage as under investigation, but given all of the details to the case, it is apparent that the Aurora Health Care Clinic is in the wrong and will probably end up paying out money to both individuals out of court. References: http://www. eeoc. gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/9-12-26g. cfm