• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Termination to medical reason.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

ynotpoetry

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

Alaska law. (Right to work state)

I live in Anchorage Alaska. I have been with this company for a couple months almost. And 2 days ago I had a talk with my boss about my Hereditary disease and the effect into the work place. I was born with hemophilia. I told them about this the day they asked me to come in for an interview. I work for a delivery company which requires lifting, pulling, pushing, and moving heavy objects. Well I came in one morning addressing the issue that I had a current injury in my elbow that made it very difficult to move. I also addressed that I was unable to life 100 pounds and that I would have to take it easy that day. Well I found out that even on an easy day that I had not one injury but two that made my arm even worse that very afternoon. I took medicine to try and resolve the injury but It didn't help. I notified my dispatcher that I would be unable to make it to work the next day. Went to my doctors that morning to take my meds again as I needed and received a doctors note to excuse me from work until this was resolved. She then talked to me about how many sick days I had taken already after being on the job for a month and that I was about to exceed my 4 days a year due to 2 days being sick and on drugs and the one day with a liable doctors note. I was able to work just not anything physical with my left arm if needed be. I was told that I was a liability issue to the company and because of my medical status that they did not want a workman's comp filed against them as it is very costly. She told me that I was either going to be terminated or I could work 1-4 hours a day doing transfers. And gave me a day to think about it. I had called her and told her that I did not want to be fired and that I would like to stay and work. Now her excuse was that she had a meeting to attend the next day with her boss's and that she doesn't know the reason to what the meeting is about and will address the concern to me after that. And that I would not be fired but laid off from work.

I would like to know as to how this is viable and acceptable to be told that I am a liability and a major workman's comp claim. I have medical insurance and I pay out the ass for it as the company doesn't have one, so I am covered on my end for any injuries and I can not physically claim something like this against the company as to I can't prove that it came from work. And I would never do such a thing as to I can heal myself within 3-4 days if it is a major internal bleed such as this.

Is their a possibility that she over stepped her bounds by saying that i am a liability and I can take her to court for accusing me of that?
 


ecmst12

Senior Member
You ARE a liability, you were injured a month after you started the job and your condition makes you unsuitable for a job that requires a lot of physical activity.

Regardless, you have not been on the job long enough to qualify for FMLA, so it's legal for them to fire you for missing even ONE day for sickness or injury. Even with a doctor's note.
 

ynotpoetry

Junior Member
reply to why

Why is it that people say I "AM" like they want to shove it down my throat? I take my medicine to stay physically active the way anyone else is able to. I was not injured due to the job labor. I was injured elsewhere or at anytime. I actually was having less bleeds due to the labor as being active in my life. I am truly capable of doing almost any type of job as long as I stay up on my medicine.

Also I don't have to work as hard due to the fact that we have forklifts, handlifts, and hand carts. So the only time I really have to put mostly any effort into working is when I am lifting an object or having to carry heavy objects over time.

Next what about the the laws that protect one from being terminated due to disabilities? Isn't their an act or something? An employer alone should not be able to verbally spout that because of a disability that they were informed about is the cause of the termination. Am I right?

I have also worked a long time doing physical labor as someone who does not have a college degree because its all that I can find that pays decently with medical coverage, and I have not had any issue or discussion's from them that I was a liability due to my medical concern. And also they have not terminated me or put me on suspension, or told me to return to work would I be able to collect the time that I could have been working even if it was light duty?
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
You were not fired because of your disability. You were fired because you missed too much time from work in the first months of your employment. That is legal.
 

Ozark_Sophist

Senior Member
You ARE a liability, you were injured a month after you started the job and your condition makes you unsuitable for a job that requires a lot of physical activity.

Regardless, you have not been on the job long enough to qualify for FMLA, so it's legal for them to fire you for missing even ONE day for sickness or injury. Even with a doctor's note.
Incorrect answer. It is possible a reasonable accommodation should have been available and granted under Title 1 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. OP should file a complaint with the EEOC, so federal investigators can look at all the facts to make a determination. The issue maay or may not rise to the level of unlawful discrimaation because of a disability. A company may not cite risk of worker's compensation claim as a part of a rationale for termination.
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
It was an ignorant comment, but the actual reason he was terminated was because of the unprotected absence.
 

cyjeff

Senior Member
Incorrect answer. It is possible a reasonable accommodation should have been available and granted under Title 1 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. OP should file a complaint with the EEOC, so federal investigators can look at all the facts to make a determination. The issue maay or may not rise to the level of unlawful discrimaation because of a disability. A company may not cite risk of worker's compensation claim as a part of a rationale for termination.
We do not know if the OP qualifies for ADA protection.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Even if the ADA applies, the ADA does not require that the employer accept a greater number of absences than they would accept in a non-disabled employee.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top