Disability

Kevin Brown
Member - 76 posts

Why did you enquire about medical conditions? If it was to potentially exclude him from the selection process, the inference is that you did so because the condition might affect his ability to do the job. In effect, this would act as a dis-ability and would be discriminatory. He may well have unpleasant memories of similar unsuccessful interviews and not consider either possible answer relevant . Hands up everybody who hasn't embelished their CV at some point. Medical conditions are regarded by many people as deeply personal matters, as much or more so as religious belief or sexual orientation. Our ailments define us.
Provided that the condition is properly managed it should be perfectly possible for him to perform his work to an acceptable standard. You need to consider the possible consequences of terminating his employment, if that's an option you're looking at. Meanwhile you might use the Search facility, or I'm pretty sure someone will know of a precedent ( I seem to remember reading something lately).

Anne McAllister
Member - 118 posts

Unfortunately some people still feel the need to hide medical conditions as they are so used to/afraid of being discriminated against.
If you look under other topics on here ( I think it was " witholding information re disability) you will see a wide ranging correspondence about this issue.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

Oh Please -here we go again. The post you are talking about Anne is "False (missing) information and it is STILL on going with an almost identical theme.
There is obviously something wrong in recruitment within companies at the moment that they dont know that they should not be asking these questions at interview, it is almost the same as asking a women if she is planning to have children. I ask you, if you have two good candidates in front of you which you are having a problem splitting and then you ask a question about medical conditions and one of them pops up with "Actually I have this or that - are you honestly going to tell me you are not going to disregard them for the other candidate??? I rest my case - which is why there should be proceedures in place to safe guard this from not happening.
If you want screening done for medical conditions it should have been done long before the interview stage hopefully with an OHA and even before that stage with a suitably worded document sent out with the application details which would be returned to OHA for screening.
I am not even going to bother to answer the question other than to suggest you read the other topic posts where you will get the answer to your question. I am feeling too frustrated with this issue to answer but I think you get the idea!

Keith Williams
Member - 2 posts

There is no reason why a diabetic should not perform as well as anyone else in the workplace. Assuming his role is not one of the few not open to people with diabetes, you should be supportive and encourage him to be as open about his condition as he wishes to be. He should be allowed to manage his diabetes as he needs to, taking glucose tablets or similar if and when necessary. He should also not feel pressured to miss or delay a meal break, as this will help him retain good diabetic control.

I have been diabetic myself for 27 years, since the age of nine. It has never been an issue at work or amongst work colleagues, whom I have chosen to inform about my condition. However, that was my choice to do so; similarly, it is the choice of this individual whether he wishes to share this information.

With 2.2 million diabetics in the UK, and numbers increasing, then diabetes in the workplace is obviously a pertinent issue. I would suggest that your best way forward is to work with this individual and be supportive, and hopefully he will develop into the valued employee you suggest.

derek agent
Member - 5 posts

Having been a Diabetic for over 35 years I can understand people for not disclosing the condition. I have lost jobs because I was honest and declared the condition, however, over the last 15/20 years people have taken no notice of the problem. I do however feel that it is unfair to ask these medical questions, I am as fit as the next person and it is I feel an afront to ask such personal questions, it is between me and my Doctor and any person that I wish to tell. On the other hand it is good practise to tell work colleagues so that they know what to do in an emergency such as a HYPO (low blood sugar). My previous employer did a simple Risk Assessment to cover such instances. To even ask the question as to what should we do only has one answer, and that is give the person as much support as he/she needs.

Bruce McQuillan
Member - 9 posts

The question says more than the answers here Veronica. The employee you describe has a chronic medical condition, he is not a reformed criminal where there would be a moral question as to whether you should give him a "second chance".

If you were to consider dismissing this candidate as a result of DDA related illness then then i would suggest that legal system would be more likely to look at you, as the Employer as if you were a criminal, and quite rightly so.

After all Veronica is the fact that you have asked this question in itself not justification, from your employee's perspective, to withold information about his chronic medical condition. It is clear from your comments that you are considering what action, if any, you should take, simply because the employee has a disability !

How would you feel if you came on this message board and found an email from your boss suggesting he wished to dismiss you because you were not a natural blonde ?

derek agent
Member - 5 posts

Being a Diabetic is NOT a disability, nor is it chronic. The condition can be easily treated with drugs as can other medical problems, say an ulcer or IBS for example where someone has to take medicines to control the condition for maybe life.

Diabetes may be serious but is it a disability? No, is it chronic? No providing the person looks after themselves and certainly no more than other medical condition.

Kevin Brown
Member - 76 posts

Sorry Derek, I have to disagree. I also am a diabetic (but I'm not sure exactly for how long, having been one of the millions of undiagnosed for several years at least).
The current definition of disability under DDA is now a legal one, not based on medical opinion.
The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) was designed to protect people who would generally be regarded as disabled from discrimination.
The Act defines disability as: "a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day to day activities."
To be considered a long-term adverse effect: the effect has to have lasted, or be likely to last, overall for at least 12 months. And be a detrimental one - in other words harmful, or cause damage or loss.
The effects that matter are those that would be present without medication or treatment. Whilst I can function normally by controlling my diabetes with medication, I can remember the state I was in before being diagnosed and can well imagine how that could happen again if I fail to medicate properly.
I understand the word 'chronic' to mean lasting, or lingering. 35 years must surely qualify under those terms alone. The keywords are, of course, WITHOUT MEDICATION.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

Veronica you might also do well to remember Sir Steve Redgrave who is probably this countries most famous diabetic being also this countries most famous olympian. If you are going to consider disregarding people like him as well as the 2.2 million others including your poor employee simply because they are forced to replace something in their bodies that you and I are lucky enough to have naturally then its a very sad place to be. Next you will be asking women if they are taking HRT or anyone else a list of medications.

There is absolutly no reason why this condition should affect this persons ability to do their job providing their medical care is being managed properly, which should not impact on your business anymore than any other employee. Your only concern would be to see that anyone working with him was aware of the situation in case of an emergency, providing of course that the employee themselves gave permission for the condition to be disclosed.

Bruce McQuillan
Member - 9 posts

Derek Type 1 diabetes (insulin controlled) is a "chronic medical condition" in terms of the DDA. As Kevin suggests the test for this would be the effects without treatment. Since the log term effects of insulin depedant diabetes without medication are coma and death i would say thats pretty final, speaking as an insulin dependant Type 1 Diabetic with no reincarnation fantasies !

From a practical viewpoint however i can understand your hesitation in labelling it as such simply because on a day to day basis a diabetic can perform and indeed outperform someone without, just look at Steve Redgrave.

Nevertheless in a society as negative as the one we live in where, as you suggest, you feel you have been treated less favourably because you declared your condition it is for that very reason that since 1995 the DDA has protected you.

Until, to pharaphrase Martin Luther King, lil diabetic boys and lil employer girls can play nice together, i would suggest you avail yourself of any protection that is afforded to you by law.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

It was for the very reason that lil disabled boys and Lil employer girls could not play nice together that the DDA had to come into force and unfortunately has been shown by so many of the posts here, they still have not learnt how to play - even after 13 years!

Bruce McQuillan
Member - 9 posts

Absolutely Carole ! Issues surrounding disability are still anathema, in fact lets just call it "difference" because the problem is rarely the limits of that disability but that perception of "difference". Its the same generosity of human spirit that makes us marvel at an Amazon Tribe when we watch it on Bruce Parry and then build a motorway through their lands with no thought for anything but the prize fuel, diamonds, minerals whatever.

Whatever happened to "its not the winning that counts but how you play the game" ? And WE are the civilised ones, yes ?

Bozena Benton
Member - 50 posts

Veronica,

You ask what should you do.

The first thing is to talk with him. Tell him that it was not the brightest idea to not eat thereby making him ill, but that if he was trying to hide it from you it didn't work. Ask him how he manages his diabetes and whether there is anything you need to put in place to enable him so to do.

You should talk to him to see if there is anything you expect him to do (duties or working practices) that would be detrimental to his diabetes. The chances are that he would have thought about this before he accepted the job. Knowing the serious consequences that can occur when mismanaging diabetes I doubt whether anyone deliberately puts themselves in that situation. You may find that he keeps his diabetes under control provided that he eats regularly, takes his medication and keeps all his medical appointments. There may be times when he needs more intervention but those can be addressed at the time.

If you are still concerned you can ask him to see your OH specialist for further advice. Once you are fully informed you can then make appropriate decisions.

Don't assume the worst - you may find that you've recruited a star and that with your support minimise any health problems.

Tony Williams
Member - 15 posts

Veronica

People with insulin dependent diabetes can have significant difficulties with shiftwork, and there are certain tasks where diabetes that is not adequately controlled can put them or others at serious risk, such as driving vehicles including fork lift trucks, operating cranes, working at heights, travel abroad etc.. He may need an appropriate place where he can inject insulin in private and it is important that others know his condition and what to do in case he has a 'hypo' at work.

It is clearly important to be supportive, explain that you want to ensure that now that you know his condition you can fulfil your duty of care, and can make reasonable adjustments if these are needed. If you have any concerns, a referral to occupational health would be advisable, and this would enable him to maintain confidentiality if he does not wish to discuss issues with you.

With good support many employees with diabetes can participate fully in employment; he may well be able to do more with support than he realises.

Helen C
Member - 15 posts

My Colleague is diabetic and I think it IS something that should be declared when starting a new job.....because it helps me and others to recognise if there is a problem. Instead of thinking "shes quiet today" and leaving it at that, the thinking changes to "Shes quiet today, she is diabetic, I will make sure she is ok" .Sorry its long winded but I know what I mean lol! Another thing, as I said in the other thread, why is it ok for a disabled person to go for an interview and blatantly lie and then get the sympathy vote? I notice it a lot on here. If a person who is not disabled tells a lie at interview, they do not get the sympathy vote. I am all for equal oppurtunities and rightly so, but it can not constantly be one sided. Personaly, I thnk Employers are in a no win situation..if the Interviewer asks about medical conditions at interview, that is wrong and if their dare should be a "discriminating" comment after employee declares it after gaining the position, it is wrong! I KNOW we are not allowed to ask certain questions at interveiws but please do not tar everyone with the same brush. I do try to understand that disabled people may not disclose this at interview so what do I do after they get the job and disclose it? In my eyes they have blatantly lied for whatever reason and to carry on letting them work for me would then be discriminating against the honest ones who came for a job! As a matter of fact, I have disabled people working for me and was once accused of giving them preferential treatment! Like I said, you just cant win these days! Please dont shout at this post, it is bullying.

Jennifer Chapman
Member - 17 posts

Gosh - aren't we all getting hot under the collar!

You cannot ask whether a person has a medical condition so if you don't ask - how can the interviewee lie to you? If you do ask then accuse him of lying - is that not a form of entrapment, in that he would suspect if he says 'Yes' - then you wouldn't employ him?

Most intelligent interviewers ask an open question ie 'Is there anything else you want to tell us?' (note the WANT - not the NEED !) at which stage personally I have always said 'Well I have been a Type 1 diabetic for the last 36 years - but have to say, that doesn't usually affect the way I do my job - however because of it, I do need to attend fairly regular hospital and other medical appointments and also means I do need to be fairly regular - especially with lunchtimes etc.' There usually ensues a brief conversation about how many appointments etc. I have been known to add 'Don't forget, it also could have positive advantages for you, in that since I am now officially classed as a disabled person it might help you show you are an 'Equal Opportunities' employer - with really minimal disruption to your business'

That should be 'end of conversation' as far as I'm concerned!

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

Helen - I won’t shout or bully because I know what that’s like - it’s not nice.

What somebody should do and what they actually do end up saying at interview are two entirely different things and that is the case whether you are disabled or not.

If you are Diabetic you are covered under the DDA and therefore do not have to disclose this fact at interview if you are not comfortable doing so. Of course in a perfect world it would be nice to think that this person would have felt comfortable enough to tell you but obviously because of previous negative experiences did not feel able to do so - this is not lying it is his right. The fact that it would be in this persons best interest to do so (which I think we all agree on) is not the point of the original post.

If a person who lies at interview is not disabled they do not get a sympathy vote - well 99% of the time this is the case and rightly so but it depends on the lie. If it is about a medical condition then they too could be covered under the DDA without realising it, if they are not they utter the lie knowingly. The difference between the disabled person and the non-disabled person is that the disabled person knows that they do not have to disclose. The fact remains that nobody disabled or not should ever be put in a position at interview where they have to lie on medical issues. Questions should not be asked in the first place because candidates should have been given an opportunity to disclose issues before interview stage.

Unfortunately Helen so many disabled people have been discriminated against at interview that they feel that they have to use the DDA to its full extent to protect themselves in order to secure a job even when it may not be in their own best interest medically. In a perfect world if ALL employers played from a level playing field this would not be necessary and everyone disabled or not would get a fair crack of the whip. Unless or until this happens I am afraid that people will go on hiding things and being economical with the truth at interview - sadly.

Helen C
Member - 15 posts

Thank you for the replies to my post. I am an Equal Oppurtunities Employer and always state this in job vacancies with the green two ticks symbol . In my post I said IF an Employer asks about a medical condition, not that I had ASKED.There is no need for me to ask because it has already been dealt with before the interview stage, and in some cases a medical condition has not been disclosed when the interviewee has been given the oppurtunity. I treat all candidates exactly the same and I certainly would not "use" a disability of one of my staff to promote that I am an Equal Oppurtunities Employer, My Company speaks for itself. It seems to me that I am expected to treat the disabled member of staff different to others, when it suits. When it does not suit I am told this is discrimination. As you said Carole, the difference between the disabled person and the non disabled one is that the disabled one knows that they do not have to disclose...so really thay are treated differently from the start, which is what they do not want! I think it is terrible that disabled people have been discriminated against at interview stage and I can understand their concerns, but we are not all like that. I could say that as an Employer I too am being discriminated against by being judged before the interview. I think we are losing sight of the fact that when one applys for a job, the Employer (not all) will choose who is best suited for that position and certainly. as in my case, regardless of race, sex, creed, religion and disabilities. If I choose a non disabled person for that position it is because they are the best person for the job and vice versa, if I choose a disabled person over a non disabled one. A disabled person has a right to use the DDA if they need to, as is their right. The non disabled person has no rights as I see it. They are told they have not got the job and thats it. They have to accept it and move on. That is my opnion on the matter so please try to respect it as I have respected your opinions.

Tony Williams
Member - 15 posts

The simplest way to avoid discrimination like this at the interview is to conduct the process in two stages. Interview candidates and select the best one, then after this process is complete ask about any disabilities that are likely to be relevant. Asking about medical problems may well appear intrusive and may well be unnecessary. All you need to ask is 'do you believe you have a disability or medical problem that might affect your ability to work or your health at work?' with just a 'yes/no' tick box.

You can then ask if they are happy to discuss the issues with you, explaining that you only need to know so you can help them, make appropriate adjustments, and ensure they are looked after appropriately if they become unwell at work. If it is necessary to ask about matters that would generally be considered confidential, it may be better to use an occupational health service; this will also ensure that medical information is held securely away from all other personnel data.

Some of the postings have questioned the issue of 'positive discrimination'. The DDA does require an element of positive discrimination unlike all other anti-discrimination legislation. It will be interesting to see how this particular issue is handled in the proposed Single Equality Bill.

Jennifer Chapman
Member - 17 posts

I'm sorry, I didn't mean what I said to sound as a criticism or infer that you did it - I don't know the actual method of obtaining the 'two ticks' and have always assumed it would be necessary for an employer to actually demonstrate that they ARE to the relevant powers that be, hence assumed it would be useful to them to know that they are indeed employing disabled people - and can't see that anyone would be able to do that, unless they actually knew it to be true - is this assumption incorrect?

Helen C
Member - 15 posts

Employers who use the symbol have agreed with Jobcentre Plus that they will take action on these five commitments:

to interview all disabled applicants who meet the minimum criteria for a job and consider them on their abilities

to ensure s a mechanism in place to discuss, at any time, but at least once a year, with disabled employees what can be done to make sure they can develop and use their abilities

to make every effort when employees become disabled to make sure they stay in employment

to take action to ensure that all employees develop the appropriate level of disability awareness needed to make these commitments work

to annually review the five commitments and what has been achieved, plan ways to improve on them and let employees and Jobcentre Plus know about progress and future plans

I had 2 disabled members of staff already working for me at the time when I decided to start using the Job Centre who in turn informed me about the sign
and its commitments. I am not aware of having to show proof, but I did have all this set in place already when I advertised a job with the job centre... I do not know how othere Employers have got on with this...it will be good to know.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

Your commitment is admirable well done and I am sure you are showing up a lot of much bigger employers who will probably show the sign, hide behind it, but actually do very little.

Sorry if this sounds very cynical but it’s the same with all their Diversity programmes, they are very good at showing that they have one in place but acting on them is quite a different matter as proven by a lot of the posts on this site.

Big Companies are very good at jumping on the band wagon in order to make their public persona look good. The people from within the company who put the policies in place also genuinely believe that what they are doing works. Unfortunately that’s where it stops because the company is not prepared to spend money training and educating the people that have to implement the policies to make sure they work properly.

Jennifer Chapman
Member - 17 posts

Hear, hear, Carole! - we get situations when we can't get answers out of HR for existing staff and are told things like 'sorry it's taken us 3 weeks but we've been a bit busy owing to the take-overs' - well what are top management thinking of, taking over another company, when the HR dept is already bogged down?

I have said if they were my insurance brokers (our business) I'd sack em. Are the existing employees not their cleints?

Phil Lemon
Member - 49 posts

'is diabetes a dissability' ; Yes, according to the DWP
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/employers/dda/who_covered.asp
and is it cronic; Yes, 'an illness or problem persisting for a long time'

It is the diabetics responsibility to look after themselves, but when you employ them and now know about their ciondition, you and they have to work together to manage the now known specific risk to them which they and you should address appropriately. As long as the person manages their condition appropriately, there should be very little risk, if they do not/can not manage their condition, then is the time to refer them either to their GP or through an occupational health assessment to ensure that you are managing the risks appropriately.

As a First Aider I would want to know if there were people with conditions which if there was a problem and it was identified early a life could be saved. It does NOT mean that you have to wear a bell around your neck but the right people should i believe be told. First Aiders, should 'i believe' be told about anyone (with their consent o0f course) who has an illness or condition that;
can be treated easily if the symptoms present and are recognized early
would need specific treattment
could potentially endanger the first aider or others
This means that they are better able to help them and protect themselves if anything should happen

If i were a diabetic (and both my parents are) i would want my local first aiders to know so they are aware of the signs, especially if recently diagnosed when levels are likely to be fluctuating

if someone comes in for interview in a wheelchair, or they are carrying a white stick (i am emphasising here for those that need it) you know that they may have accessibility issues which may need to be addressed within your workplace depending on what has already been done. If someone has a degenerative condition, MS for instance, they may not currently have issues which need to be addressed, but they may develop them in time. In the same way that a person with diabetes may not have any accessibility issues when they start work with you but there is the potential for them to develope. This is where they could be helped to stay in the workplace, one of the foundations of the DDA being to improve access for the disabled not omnly to goods and services but work also.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

I agree Phil with everything you say - providing we are all playing from a level playing field.

I recently read this on an online application form for a job:-
Health
A disability or health problem will not preclude full consideration of your application -
Please specify any serious or recurring illnesses, major surgery, injuries or disabilities and give brief details -
How many days have you been absent from work owing to illness in the last 2 years?

The company says " we are striving to be an Equal Opportunities Employer".
My first thought is well you either are or you are not and secondly as a disabled person i would be very nervous about answering the above questions and expecting to get an "equal" crack at getting to the next round. I wonder if under the DDA some of those questions are allowed? What does everyone else think? If not this would be a typical example of why perhaps somebody may end up doing what our original post explained and why we end up with the many other posts of a similar nature on here because people feel its the only way they can apply for the job.

Tony Williams
Member - 15 posts

Phil

You are right to recommend that first-aiders in particular should be informed if employees have conditions that could cause sudden illness or incapacity, and right to state that this should only be done with the employee's consent.

It is important to understand that it is not the condition that is the disability, but the effect a condition has on the individual (apart from conditions named in the DDA: MS, HIV and cancer). Some individuals have Type 2 diabetes that is diet controlled and may not have a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. It is much rarer for individuals with Type 2 diabetes to suffer from sudden collapses even if they take insulin because the underlying problem is very different.

It is also important to appreciate that sometimes employers try so hard to care they can appear intrusive, so employees may perceive them to be discriminatory. The DDA does not override Health and Safety Law, so any question that can be justified under the Health and Safety At Work Act and associated legislation can be justified under the DDA. The employer also has a duty to make adjustments, and can only be expected to do so if he knows that an employee has a disability. A balance therefore has to be struck between asking questions that are appropriate and justified, and asking questions that are not.

There are many jobs where the need for specific questions is minimal; the only question you may need to ask is 'do you think you have a disability that affects you at work?'. In cases where there may be a reason to ask sensitive questions it is often best practice to use an occupational health service to ask the questions so management are only told what they need to know.

Tony

Phil Lemon
Member - 49 posts

In addition to my previous comment

I have always found that being open and up front about any medical issues/mobility problems i have has always paid off as long as you present any positive sides.

But, if you are going into an intrerview, be prepared and have the answers and arguments to support your case before you go in. Do not try to bluff or avoid the issues as they are bound to surface at some point.

Jennifer Chapman
Member - 17 posts

Re 'How many days off due to illness' - I would not include my diabetes here, only colds or whatever other ailments I have lost time over, the reason being that disability related absence is not the same (legally) as sickness related absence. 99% of the time I have ever lost due to diabetes is to attend hospital/doctors/ other necessary appointments - so not due to being ill !

And of course - any time lost because of disability (whether 'ill' with it or not) does not count as part of allocated sick-leave.

I too have always "just been truthful" as I'm far too 'legal, decent, honest and truthful' to allow me personally to seek to pull the wool over anyone's eyes and wouldn't be comfortable in doing that.

Tony Williams
Member - 15 posts

Jennifer

You should be careful about this. Sickness absence is any absence due to sickness, and includes disability related sickness absence. If it is disability related, the employer is expected to make 'reasonable adjustments' when considering taking disciplinary action. If the level of absence is still unreasonable after taking the disability into account then disciplinary action including termination of contract can be justified even though it is discriminatory.

It also depend how your employer recorded your absence and on what sick pay arrangements are in place. If you took the time off as 'sickness' then it would be reasonable for an employer to consider this against your total time off for sickness. If you took it as holiday or unpaid leave this would be different. While there is an expectation under the DDA that an employer will allow time off to attend hospital appointments there is no legal requirement that this should be paid time off and it can be argued that individuals should where possible arrange such appointments outside work time.

Some organisations do have 'trigger points' which could be considered to be 'allocated sick leave', but many do not. Some organisations also come to an agreement with individuals who have disabilities to 'allocate' additional sick leave, but again most do not.

If you fail to declare your full sickness absence record, and this is subsequently considered to be relevant to the decision to employ you (if the level is considered 'unreasonable' when disability is taken into account) the employer could take disciplinary action against you.

This may sound very unfair, however if your employer asks these questions before offering you the post, and you claim discrimination, they will have to prove that they did not discriminate. This will be difficult for them unless they have clear objective evidence that another candidate was better than you. The law is clearly on your side, but in practice very few DDA cases concern pre-employment discrimination.

Jennifer Chapman
Member - 17 posts

LOL at Tony - where exactly in the UK can you arrange any NHS HOSPITAL Out-Patient Clinic appointments outside Monday-Friday 09.00 - 17.30 or obtain Retinal Screening ouside office hours?

Or NHS dental appointments, or most doctors appointments unless you can let the surgery know about a month in advance when you are going to be ill?

James Fairchild
Member - 226 posts

Tony,

I found your post very useful and interesting. Your advice is, potentially, something very useful to a line manager or HR trying to manage an issue.

Carole Simmons
Member - 52 posts

I agree james, tony's post was very interesting. Going back to my previous post therefore I would say that perhaps that particular job application form says more about the company thean they perhaps realise!
On the basis of what Tony says I would give them a wide berth no matter how good the job looks!!