Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...What types of employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations?
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers who have 15 or more employees are usually required to provide reasonable accommodations. Some state and local laws may require that employers with fewer employees provide reasonable accommodations....
California Fair Employment and Housing Act requires employers of five or more employees to provide reasonable accommodation for individuals with a physical or mental disability to apply for jobs and to perform the essential functions of their jobs unless it would cause an undue hardship. Reasonable accommodation can include, but is not limited to, the following:
Changing job duties
Providing leave for medical care
Changing work schedules
Relocating the work area
Providing mechanical or electrical aids
Employers must initiate an “interactive process” when an applicant or employee requests reasonable accommodations. The employer must also offer to initiate an interactive process when the employer becomes aware of the possible need for an accommodation.
In California, it is unlawful for an employer to fail to engage in a timely, good faith, interactive process. The point of the process is to remove barriers that keep people from performing jobs that they could do with some form of accommodation.
California is an “at-will” state in terms of employment law. This means that most jobs can be terminated by the employer (as well as the employee) at any time.
If a person can't perform and costs you $$, e-z decision.
California is an “at-will” state in terms of employment law. This means that most jobs can be terminated by the employer (as well as the employee) at any time.
If a person can't perform and costs you $$, e-z decision.
You can't fire someone because their disability prevents them from lifting a can of paint when they are, otherwise, getting the job done. Discontent does not allow at-will to trump disability laws. Having someone else on the team carry the can of paint is a reasonable accommodation.
You can't fire someone because their disability prevents them from lifting a can of paint when they are, otherwise, getting the job done. Discontent does not allow at-will to trump disability laws. Having someone else on the team carry the can of paint is a reasonable accommodation.
In "an at will state" you need no reason to fire someone.
I have a part time handyman who refuses to do certain jobs citing medical condition.
That sounds like a HIRING problem/error.
Did you really not know about this issue or did you just discount it's importance?
(If this was a real payroll type job these Q's can get complicated fast.)
But yeah, your casual labor helper person needs to be 'let go' --
because they shouldn't have been taken on to begin with.
If the employee is part time, don't schedule him on the days when you know there is work that he wouldn't be able to perform, just schedule him for the light jobs.
I am not an attorney, but it seems that if he is part time, you would have more flexibility. I wouldn't even mention it, just think of it as managing any employees that have different skill sets and abilities.
I have a part time handyman who refuses to do certain jobs citing medical condition. He supposedly has some heart condition; thus he refuses to lift a lot of stuff (like a 5 gallon of paint). While I understand the medical consideration, the fact that he cannot perform as other handymen is brewing discontent.
Making things worse, the staff in question feels he's JUSTIFIED in refusing to do certain tasks because of the medical condition. That attitude also gets to people.
Should I let this guy go? From management perspective, I need people to perform.
I didn't read through this thread, so excuse me if I repeated anything. I have 2 questions off the top of my head:
1) When you FIRST interviewed him, did you NOT ask if he had any physical ailments that would prevent him from doing the job? Or did he not mention his health condition then. You'd think he'd want to be up-front, but then I can see him not mentioning it so as to get the job, then later refuse not to do most of the physical demands, so YOU should have been the one to ask.
2) Did you ask for a doctor's note about this when he first started refusing to do the simplest of tasks? If he can't supply it, then you can let him go, I'd think. If he says something like he'd have to go to his doctor to get it, allow him time to. When he gives you the note, then verify it to see if you can catch him in a lie &/or of it's just some made-up document.
We have 3 handymen, who are supposed to be able to do everything (fix, build, paint, haul, clean, etc). As jobs come in, I assign them to whoever is available. For this employee, he only wants to or can do certain tasks. This means often he's standing around while others are sweating it out. Recently we renovated a laundry room and had to move 20 big machines out; that staff just stood by.
If I let this continue, I fear I cannot command others to work.
As a former HR executive I can’t emphasize enough how you need to talk to an attorney that specializes in employment law. Workers Compensation and Reasonable Accommodation are issues that you need to educate yourself on. Do. this. Immediately.
That sounds like a HIRING problem/error.
Did you really not know about this issue or did you just discount it's importance?
(If this was a real payroll type job these Q's can get complicated fast.)
But yeah, your casual labor helper person needs to be 'let go' --
because they shouldn't have been taken on to begin with.
How can you know a person has health issue when you are in the process of interview and hiring?
At my workplace, there are a few who got hired; and they had worked for six months to one year with perfect attendance, and they worked perfectly well as everyone else. Then when they got the benefit package, they started to call in sick often. And 2 -3 years later, they went for sick leave for six weeks to six months and came back and requested for light duties due to they had chronic back pain, carpal tunnel, elbow pain, knee pain, heart problem, etc... whatever else.
Worst, when they come back, they keep talking about their health problems constantly, and how they struggle. They sound like "survivors" and "heroes". Coworkers who don't call in sick and work hard have to listen to them and give them attention and sympathy. Some managers even favour those "sick" ones for some reason and push others to help them and take their slacks (a lot). And then, eventually, many others call in sick also. It's like this kind of "sickness" and talking about it is contagious. It's like one or a few bad apples can spoil the whole barrow. It's crazy.
Harding working employees cannot complain about the "sick" ones because they don't know what's really going on, and it is none of their business. They just have to shut up and to take more work. Otherwise, they will be in trouble. Working in such environment and under such some manager, it's better to call in sick than complaining. How easy and simple that is. And when there's chaos and no good customer service, that's the management's problem because they don't know how to handle the "sick" employees and treat the hard working employees right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.