Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 2002. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
San Francisco Chronicle. - Tuesday, June 11, 2002
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
The ruling, in the case of a Southern California refinery worker with a liver disease, alarmed advocates for HIV-positive people and the mentally ill, who said cost-conscious employers could exaggerate or invent health concerns to turn applicants away.
It will make it "easier for employers to discriminate, to adopt safety reasons that were based on stereotypes -- 'Don't hire someone with a mental illness for a stressful job,' -- that sort of thing," said attorney Ira Burnim of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law in Washington, D.C.
"I can envision all kinds of scenarios in which employers decide that jobs are too stressful or jobs expose people to all kinds of toxins, and that that would be dangerous to people with HIV," said American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Matthew Coles.
The saving grace for disabled workers, Cole said, was that the court said employers must rely on "the most current medical knowledge" or "the best available objective evidence" rather than stereotypes. Coles said those safeguards might work for applicants who had their own doctors and lawyers.
Businesses said the ruling would promote safety without fostering discrimination against the disabled.
The ruling allows employers to "consider the whole range of relevant safety and health risks . . . based on the individual medical record of (a job applicant) and the realities of the job," said Stephen M. Shapiro, lawyer for the company in the case, Chevron USA, now ChevronTexaco.
The case involved Mario Echazabal, who worked for contractors at Chevron's El Segundo refinery for 24 years and sought a job with Chevron, which would have offered more security and benefits. The company turned him down, saying a medical exam, which Echazabal disputes, showed liver damage caused by hepatitis C that could lead to a lethal reaction to refinery toxins.
The court has consistently given a narrow interpretation to employment rights provided under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 1990 law that prohibited discrimination against the disabled in employment and government programs and services.
In earlier rulings, the justices have ruled that the law does not apply to those whose conditions, like high blood pressure and nearsightedness, are correctable. More recently, the court rejected disability status for a worker with carpal tunnel syndrome unless she could prove she was unable to do everyday tasks at home. In Monday's ruling, the court rejected a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco that the ADA allow disabled applicants to decide whether to risk their own health.
The opinion by Justice David Souter noted that the ADA allows employers to reject disabled applicants who threaten the health or safety of other workers.
Although the law does not mention a threat to one's own health, a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulation lets employers reject applicants on that basis, and Souter said the EEOC's interpretation of the law was reasonable.
The case is Chevron USA vs. Echazabal, No. 00-1406.
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
020611
SC020601
Copyright © 2002 - San Francisco Chronicle Press. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission. Reproduction of this article (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the San Francisco Chronicle, Permissions Desk, 901 Mission Street, San Franciso, CA 94103. You may also send a fax to (415) 495-3843, or an email message to chronperm@sfgate.com. http://www.sfgate.com.
AEGiS is a 501(c)3, not-for-profit, tax-exempt, educational corporation. AEGiS is made possible through unrestricted funding from Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, Elton John AIDS Foundation, the National Library of Medicine, Pacific Life Foundation and donations from users like you.
Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 2002. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.
Copyright ©1980, 2002. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .