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.
HIV disease is covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Armando Gutierrez was a server at a Big Biscuit restaurant in Overland Park, Kansas, when he found out he had HIV in December 2018. Soon after, he asked his manager to sign a form so he could get HIV medication from a state program, according to the lawsuit filed in federal court.
A day later, Gutierrez was told he was being transferred to another location and would have to work Sundays, despite an agreement made when he was hired about a year earlier that he couldn't work that day because of "family commitments," the complaint says.
Gutierrez was fired when he told the restaurant he couldn't work that schedule, the lawsuit claims. The suit seeks back pay and damages. I think the employee is looking for a payday he doesn't deserve
Just as any employee can quit without advance notice, neither should any employer have to justify reasons for termination. There is no such thing as wrongful termination, unless both parties have agreed to a contract outlying specific terms for termination and one party acts in breach of.
The Americans with Disabilities Act is an illegitimate scheme concocted by self-serving politicians to purchase votes.
And its actually a good reason to not hire anyone with a disability.
I don't think it or any infectious status should be considered a disability and no one should be forced to associate. I don't want anyone like that working in my food supply.
The manger may have to prove that they were "accommodating" his disability by transferring him and rescheduling him. The management no doubt had a lengthy discussion with legal and HR before telling the man of his new work situation. If the disabled person really needs this particular job he should have consulted a lawyer before revealing his disability o his employer.
I don't think it or any infectious status should be considered a disability and no one should be forced to associate. I don't want anyone like that working in my food supply.
I agree. There's a million other jobs someone with HIV can do besides handling food.
I don't know whether there was discrimination in this case. But the law is that you can't discriminate against someone with HIV or AIDS, no matter what someone's personal feelings on the matter are.
The more troubling thing with this thread is that people don't seem to understand how HIV is transmitted. It is 2019. Please tell me that you don't think you can catch HIV from someone with the virus handling your food.
People are not tested for HIV in order to work in a hospital or a nursing home or a fast food restaurant. It is a complete non-issue. It is not a virus that can be transmitted through casual contact. I have worked in healthcare and have had HIV+ patients. As long as you use universal precaution, there is almost no risk to anyone at all in the facility (the minute risk would come in if a healthcare worker accidentally got stuck with a needle used on an HIV+ patient, and even that risk is extremely small). Going to a restaurant and having your food prepared or served by someone with HIV puts you at exactly zero risk of contracting HIV from them (unless you are then going to shoot up or have unprotected sex with them after they give you your meal).
In the link from the original post, the man actually filed a complaint with the EOCC, and it was the EOCC that gave him the right to sue his former employer.
HIV status is indeed a protected class. It doesn't matter what a person's perception of HIV is, HIV status is a protected class, period.
In addition, even though Kansas is an at will state, that doesn't necessarily mean an employer is off the hook. If it was explicitly written somewhere that the employment agreement for this man that Sundays were not do-able, or there was an implicit agreement on such terms, then the man may have a case (breach of good faith). But his case is no doubt strengthened by his HIV status and the timing of him being switched deliberately to a schedule he could not work (and employer had no issues with the no Sundays for a year).
Now, on this link, it does mention he initially told his employer he had cancer, but I believe they found out about his HIV when he needed their signature to enter a state program for treating HIV. Still, that shouldn't have too much relevance here.
Anyhow he may or may not win his case. I'm just saying it's not a clear cut case of an at will employment issue.
In the link from the original post, the man actually filed a complaint with the EOCC, and it was the EOCC that gave him the right to sue his former employer.
HIV status is indeed a protected class. It doesn't matter what a person's perception of HIV is, HIV status is a protected class, period.
In addition, even though Kansas is an at will state, that doesn't necessarily mean an employer is off the hook. If it was explicitly written somewhere that the employment agreement for this man that Sundays were not do-able, or there was an implicit agreement on such terms, then the man may have a case (breach of good faith). But his case is no doubt strengthened by his HIV status and the timing of him being switched deliberately to a schedule he could not work (and employer had no issues with the no Sundays for a year).
Now, on this link, it does mention he initially told his employer he had cancer, but I believe they found out about his HIV when he needed their signature to enter a state program for treating HIV. Still, that shouldn't have too much relevance here.
Anyhow he may or may not win his case. I'm just saying it's not a clear cut case of an at will employment issue.
Just as any employee can quit without advance notice, neither should any employer have to justify reasons for termination. There is no such thing as wrongful termination, unless both parties have agreed to a contract outlying specific terms for termination and one party acts in breach of.
The Americans with Disabilities Act is an illegitimate scheme concocted by self-serving politicians to purchase votes.
And its actually a good reason to not hire anyone with a disability.
Absolutely false.
There IS such a thing as wrongful termination, for multiple legal reasons that you are not allowed to fire someone. Whether this qualifies under one of those the court will have to determine.
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.
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.
