Employers vs Sick Employees: Whose Side Are You On?

September 14th, 2010. By Hunter West

The recent spate of incidents where employees have been unjustly fired for health issues through no control of their own leaves an unsavory aftertaste, and paints employers guilty of such conduct as mean-spirited. A case in point is the former employee of a Michael’s store who felt pressured to return to work early after a double mastectomy, only to be fired soon after while continuing to undergo chemotherapy. 

As inconvenient as it might be to have a vital employee sidelined for health issues, basic human rights suggest that the employer has a moral obligation to stand behind an employee who is suffering. There are also legal requirements to that end. 

Nor should an employee who has health issues through no fault of his own—but still capable of working—find himself shut out by an employer, and from a job he needs and is quite capable of doing, just because he is not the pristine specimen that may fit the company profile. 

Employees who suffer health discrimination in the workplace can, and do fight back. Recently a breast cancer patient sued her former employer for what she claimed to be an unjust firing and was awarded millions in compensation. 

But there are two sides to every issue—and it can go both ways. 

To wit, employees have to take some responsibility for their own health. When they fail to do so, who can blame an employer for feeling angry and betrayed? 

How long have we known that smoking kills? And yet there are those who smoke like a chimney, overeat, are overweight, do not exercise and so on. A ticking time bomb. Even beyond those who take substantial risks in their spare time, such as jump out of airplanes or race cars (who may bring injury upon themselves through participation in an elective sport) are those who simply risk ill health by not living healthfully. 

Can you blame an employer for being miffed at such people? 

Yes, there are laws and regulations governing when, and if, an employer has the right to fire an employee for just cause. Provided he operates a safe work environment and advocates healthy living, the employer could garner some agreement for taking a hard line against a smoker, or a drinker who is overweight and driving a once-healthy body into ruin. Should an employer continue to stand by such an employee, by enduring long spans of sick time when the employee is absent—or having a less-effective employee because said employee simply does not bother to look after herself? 

In such an instance, I might be inclined to side with the employer. 

That said, there is no moral foundation or reason for an employer to take a hard line with an employee who, despite all his or her best efforts, develops health issues beyond that person’s control. We are all capable of falling within the unswerving and indiscriminate gaze of cancer, or under the shadow of multiple sclerosis (MS), or Lou Gehrig’s Disease (ALS). 

It is times like these when the responsible employer champions his valued employee’s cause and does what he can to make his employee’s time both on, and off work, easier. I know a fellow who has been functioning capably at work while suffering from MS for nearly 15 years. His job has changed—it’s had to. And he is slowing as the years tick by. But he remains an effective and viable employee for his employer, and is valued for his contribution in spite of his physical challenge. 

So—to the employer the message is to value your employees in sickness and in health. Do what you can to keep them, or persuade them to be healthy. And when illness comes calling, don’t forget that the same thing could happen to you, and you’d be hard-pressed to recover if your own employer simply tossed you aside for getting sick beyond your control. As an employer, you could be sued for millions. It also isn’t fair. Put yourself in their shoes. 

As for the hard-smoking, hard-drinking, overweight employee… 

Shape up. You will curry little sympathy for your irresponsible ways, if such behavior turns you into a liability at work, instead of a valued commodity. 

Tags: Employment, Job Discrimination, Sick Workers, Wellness, Workplace Discrimination

This was posted on Tuesday, September 14th, 2010 at 7:48 am and is filed under Employment . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.