Have a general question about employment law? Want to share a story? I welcome all comments and questions. I can't give legal advice here about specific situations but will be glad to discuss general issues and try to point you in the right direction. If you need legal advice, contact an employment lawyer in your state. Remember, anything you post here will be seen publicly, and I will comment publicly on it. It will not be confidential. Govern yourself accordingly. If you want to communicate with me confidentially as Donna Ballman, Florida lawyer rather than as Donna Ballman, blogger, my firm's website is here.
Showing posts with label genetic information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genetic information. Show all posts

Thursday, August 4, 2022

Employer Asking About Family Members' COVID Test Results Is Illegal

EEOC recently settled a case where an employer was deemed to have violated the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act by collecting COVID testing data about employee family members. If your employer is making you provide information about your family's COVID test results, they may be breaking the law.

So what does COVID testing have to do with genetic information? EEOC provided some guidance on What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws. They provide this information:

May an employer ask an employee who is physically coming into the workplace whether they have family members who have COVID-19 or symptoms associated with COVID-19?

No. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) prohibits employers from asking employees medical questions about family members. GINA, however, does not prohibit an employer from asking employees whether they have had contact with anyone diagnosed with COVID-19 or who may have symptoms associated with the disease. Moreover, from a public health perspective, only asking about an employee’s contact with family members would unnecessarily limit the information obtained about an employee’s potential exposure to COVID-19.

GINA generally protects employees from discrimination relating to their family medical histories, so asking for family medical information is a big no-no.

In sum, your employer can ask you if you have had contact with anyone who has COVID or COVID symptoms. They cannot specifically demand your family member's test results or whether family members have COVID or COVID symptoms. 

If you think your employer is violating GINA, contact an employee-side employment attorney in your state about your rights.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Guest Blog Post on Social Media and Employment Law: Six Things You Need to Know

Whether you’re an occasional Facebooker, a Twitter fanatic, or a well-known blogger, you need to understand the risks you face every time you post or click at work and at home. If you think what you post is private, or that you can click without consequences, think again. If you make a mistake with your social media, it can cost you your job. I did a guest blog post this week on MonsterThinking (Monster.com's excellent blog on employment and career issues) where I talk about six things you need to know about social media and employment law before you post or click.

Check it out here.

I've added MonsterThinking.com to my blogroll too. It's an excellent source of information for employees on the latest issues affecting you at work. Keep checking it out - I know I will.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and The Mentalist

A recent episode of The Mentalist showed the very first violation of the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA) that I’ve seen on TV. If you don’t know about GINA, it’s the law that says employers can’t discriminate based upon the genetic information of an employee. I think The Mentalist crossed that line in the latest episode. I talked about this from a writer’s perspective previously. But now, wearing my lawyer hat, I want to talk about why it’s a violation.

GINA says:

(a) Discrimination Based on Genetic Information.--It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer--

(1) to fail or refuse to hire, or to discharge, any employee, or otherwise to discriminate against any employee with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee; or

(2) to limit, segregate, or classify the employees of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any employee of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the status of the employee as an employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee.


The writers didn’t mean to have their character violate the law. But they did it all the same. In the latest plotline, Internal Affairs is investigating the department because a very bad guy burst into flames in his jail cell. He needed killing, as any one of the cops would tell you. This episode focused on CBI Agent Rigsby. I won’t rant about the fact that he was meeting with the IA investigator without his union rep (it’s wrong, wrong, wrong!). Okay, a little rant.

No, this rant is about the fact that the investigator looked into Rigsby’s past and found that his father had quite a colorful criminal past. The investigator then announced that criminal behavior can be genetic and that he was looking into Rigsby as a result of his association with his father. Hello? Can you say lawyers and lawsuits?

The term “genetic information” is defined under the Act as:

(A) In general.--The term “genetic information” means, with respect to any individual, information about--

(i) such individual’s genetic tests,

(ii) the genetic tests of family members of such individual, and

(iii) the manifestation of a disease or disorder in family members of such individual.


Here, the investigator decided that Rigsby’s father’s criminal behavior was a manifestation of a genetic disorder. Once the investigator decided that Rigsby’s father, and therefore Rigsby, had a genetic condition, he can’t discriminate against him because of it. Specifically, he can’t “classify [him] in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive [him] of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the status of the employee . . . .” That includes putting him under the microscope in an investigation, questioning him about other incidents from years ago, and harassing him.

I adore Simon Baker and will continue watching just for his smile (and the mostly excellent writing) but please stop this ridiculous plot line (and for God’s sake, get Rigsby a union rep) before I throw a shoe at the TV screen.

From a lawyer’s perspective, I hate it when shows get the law wrong because my clients learn what they know about employment law from TV way more than they learn it from reading their handbooks or (sadly) this blog. And most shows get this stuff laughably wrong. So, dear workers of the world, it’s fiction! Don’t rely on TV shows for legal advice. Ever.