My Washington State company locked us (union employees) out for over two years. During that time, they ran a dictatorial regime over replacement workers.
After the lockout, the company sent me to a pre-employment physical. The company nurse telephoned two days later and said that I passed the exam, but unfortunately they had discovered two minor work restrictions (one, a decade old) in my medical file. If I didn't take action to have them "cleared," there would be NO accommodation for me anywhere in the facility. I asked her what "no accommodation" meant. She said, "no job."
I requested a copy of my medical file. In it was a summary of the phone call signed and initialed by the company nurse. She wrote: "Instructed that he must get his CTS (carpal tunnel syndrome) addressed and resolved prior to expected RTW (return to work) in 9/01 as he has restrictions now that cannot be accommodated . . ."
I filed a union grievance. The company said there is no transgression. They follow the contract. The union recommended I get a lawyer, and they will back my contention.
The facility has over 1000 employees. I worked there almost 3 decades. Early on, the work was severely physical; consequently, I incurred chronic joint and muscle damage to my shoulders and arms, which was later diagnosed as Carpal Tunnel Related Disease.
Previous to the lockout, the restrictions never impacted my ability to perform 95% of duties in the facility. My seniority allowed me to avoid injurious work. Although the company was aware of my decade-old restriction, they never made an issue about it as I never really needed any manner of accommodation. Now post-lockout, however, the company has instituted a "must-perform-full-scope-of-work" policy, which I assume drives their decision and treatmentment of me and others.
During research, I discovered the company also expelled 30 others (average seniority 22 years) under similar circumstances. They have industrially-related injuries, but the company put them out on Sickness & Accident non-industrial payment and programs, and told them there was NO accommodation.
Furthermore, there is no consistency in the application of their policy. They have made accommodation for many who appear to have similar medical problems and/or more extensive restrictions than those they excluded.
It is a worldwide company, and a large facility. I believe that there are plenty of jobs I and others can do with minimal accommodation. I think the company is unreasonable.
It appears they are attempting to limit their liablility and responsibility to long-term employees injured on the job by shunting them into low-cost S&A programs designed for the non-industrially injured.
Am I (and others) being discriminated against? If so, what possible recourse do we have?
After the lockout, the company sent me to a pre-employment physical. The company nurse telephoned two days later and said that I passed the exam, but unfortunately they had discovered two minor work restrictions (one, a decade old) in my medical file. If I didn't take action to have them "cleared," there would be NO accommodation for me anywhere in the facility. I asked her what "no accommodation" meant. She said, "no job."
I requested a copy of my medical file. In it was a summary of the phone call signed and initialed by the company nurse. She wrote: "Instructed that he must get his CTS (carpal tunnel syndrome) addressed and resolved prior to expected RTW (return to work) in 9/01 as he has restrictions now that cannot be accommodated . . ."
I filed a union grievance. The company said there is no transgression. They follow the contract. The union recommended I get a lawyer, and they will back my contention.
The facility has over 1000 employees. I worked there almost 3 decades. Early on, the work was severely physical; consequently, I incurred chronic joint and muscle damage to my shoulders and arms, which was later diagnosed as Carpal Tunnel Related Disease.
Previous to the lockout, the restrictions never impacted my ability to perform 95% of duties in the facility. My seniority allowed me to avoid injurious work. Although the company was aware of my decade-old restriction, they never made an issue about it as I never really needed any manner of accommodation. Now post-lockout, however, the company has instituted a "must-perform-full-scope-of-work" policy, which I assume drives their decision and treatmentment of me and others.
During research, I discovered the company also expelled 30 others (average seniority 22 years) under similar circumstances. They have industrially-related injuries, but the company put them out on Sickness & Accident non-industrial payment and programs, and told them there was NO accommodation.
Furthermore, there is no consistency in the application of their policy. They have made accommodation for many who appear to have similar medical problems and/or more extensive restrictions than those they excluded.
It is a worldwide company, and a large facility. I believe that there are plenty of jobs I and others can do with minimal accommodation. I think the company is unreasonable.
It appears they are attempting to limit their liablility and responsibility to long-term employees injured on the job by shunting them into low-cost S&A programs designed for the non-industrially injured.
Am I (and others) being discriminated against? If so, what possible recourse do we have?