If Not During Job Interview, When Do You Tell Them?

[PrimeTimer]

My husband was fired from his job today. He was their #1 top rated employee nationwide and had an excellent work history. When they say you can't be fired for being on dialysis, that is bull. He did nothing wrong and they have known about his dialysis since he started 5 years ago. HR even once told him that he cannot be fired for being on dialysis. Today however, the HR rep that fired him admitted that she didn't know he was on dialysis but made no more mention of it. He was terminated. We were completely blindsided by this, sick to our stomachs. It's like a bad nitemare. Like they must have made some sort of mistake. My husband is thinking of contacting a lawyer but in the meantime, bills (lots of them) need to be paid. I'm glad I haven't put up a Xmas tree yet because I'd probably be throwing it out a window right now. My husband feels even worse. This can't be good for his health. His neph is probably going to have a fit. Fresenius will probably have one, that's for sure.

Anyway, sorry for the rant...back to my question. Hubby is already starting on a new resume and hoping to line up job interviews. We are wondering about when he should tell his next employer or should I say "prospective employer" that he goes to dialysis 3x a week. If not during an interview, when? How?

[Simon Dog]

If not during an interview, when? How?

Post written job offer time.

Use the terms "disability" and "reasonable accommodation".    HR will understand what you are talking about 

[PrimeTimer]

If not during an interview, when? How?

Post written job offer time.

Use the terms "disability" and "reasonable accommodation".    HR will understand what you are talking about 

BIG thanks!! 

[UkrainianTracksuit]

PT, I have nothing informative to add but I wanted to just at your husband’s misfortune. It doesn’t mean much but here is a hug. 

[justagirl2325]

Sorry for you and your husband and I agree with Simon's exact words and timing.

[PrimeTimer]

Well, hubbies employer (now former) may regret firing him. A lot of their clients have always personally requested my husband for an assignment. Even a govt agency has used him (scary, I know!). Well, like I had said, he is highly rated in the country. Well, the phone has been ringing off the hook here at home today with clients requesting...my husband! This is surely going to cost his former employer....a-holes. Hubby already had a new resume done up today and hopes for job interviews later in the week. Altho I cannot say or discuss the specifics of his work (sorry, it's for his protection) I will say it is highly specialized and requires a license. The average age for someone in his line of work to be well-honed and fully licensed is 56. He just turned 60 and has more than 25 years experience. Yeah....former employer may have shot themselves in the foot. They haven't been in the business long and so obviously have a lot still to learn. A-holes. ha ha ha

[iolaire]

Should he just move to consulting directly with theses clients?  Being aware of course of any non compete clause in his previous employers contract.

[PrimeTimer]

Should he just move to consulting directly with theses clients?  Being aware of course of any non compete clause in his previous employers contract.

There's no non-compete clause, no contract. He can work either independently or for a company and clients/the customers can choose to call upon any company and/or licensed professional of their choice. That's why clients are already calling him. They know this and they want his skill level and no screw ups or flakes. We're upset about him being fired but when the calls started coming in today we realized that perhaps he is in a better position now for the future. Maybe this will be a blessing in disguise, who knows. What's interesting is that a long while back an HR rep told him he couldn't be fired because he's in a protected class (dialysis) however, the HR rep that fired him paused for a minute and then admitted that she didn't know he was on dialysis. 'Doh!!  To put a hair up their butt he might get a lawyer.

[Paul]

(Please note that this post was modified after Simon Dog pointed out an error in it. I originally misspelled "omission" which the spell checker changed to "admission", which is what Simon Dog is talking about in his post. I have since corrected this post.)

Before I was on dialysis, before I even knew what it was, I was twice in the position of hiring people. In both cases, if it had been explained to me by the applicant at the interview, and he/she could fit it in with the work schedule, the fact that they were on dialysis would have made no difference to me in employing them. However if they had not told me at the interview and I had found out after employing them, I would have fired them for "lying by omission" during the interview.

[Simon Dog]

Before I was on dialysis, before I even knew what it was, I was twice in the position of hiring people. In both cases, if it had been explained to me by the applicant at the interview, and he/she could fit it in with the work schedule, the fact that they were on dialysis would have made no difference to me in employing them. However if they had not told me at the interview and I had found out after employing them, I would have fired them for "lying by admission" during the interview.

1.  I assume you mean "lying by omission".    There is no "omission" unless you ask.   Legally, a disability is not a liability to the job seeker, and you are prohibited from making it one.

2.  If you fire them for not volunteering they have a disability and are able to do the work with a "reasonable accommodation", you are in a world of legal hurt. Firing someone for not mentioning something you are prohibited by law from using against them would be proof that you did indeed use the disability against them and would legally be no different for firing a remote worker for failing to tell you he was black.

[Paul]

1.  I assume you mean "lying by omission".    There is no "omission" unless you ask.   Legally, a disability is not a liability to the job seeker, and you are prohibited from making it one.

Correct, that is what I mean. Misspelt "omission" and did not realise that  the spellchecker had offered up the wrong word.

2.  If you fire them for not volunteering they have a disability and are able to do the work with a "reasonable accommodation", you are in a world of legal hurt. Firing someone for not mentioning something you are prohibited by law from using against them would be proof that you did indeed use the disability against them and would legally be no different for firing a remote worker for failing to tell you he was black.

Obtaining a job by deception is not only grounds for dismissal, it is also a criminal offence! I'm not firing him for a disability, I'm fireing him for being a dishonest, lying , piece of s***! No one wants one of those working for them.

[PrimeTimer]

Here in the USA a potential employer cannot ask about disabilities during an interview. However, it is quite understandable that an employer does not want to go bankrupt over medical expenses incurred by an employee. Truth is, dialysis is a catastrophic expense -to anyone paying just some of it or for all of it. The dialysis industry itself is a big business. (wow, a medical condition actually considered an "industry"...but that is neither here or there. Dialysis sucks. It is devastating.


Not to change the subject but hear me out....  Funny, there are what they call "whistle blower" laws. Because of this people are under the impression that people should "blow the whistle" on somebody or their employer because these "whistle blower" laws protect them. From what? I've known people who blew the whistle who only ended up having their life ripped apart in court and their careers killed and reputations damaged. Some even disappeared. Now think about that...."disappeared" for speaking out against an employer. Hhmm. Makes you not want to ever uh "exercise your rights". In fact, it scares the bejesus out of you so much so that you do your best to just move along. It's a hard pill to swallow and you don't want to. Anyways, no doubt in my mind that some of the laws meant to protect the disabled work a lot like the so-called whistle-blower laws.

As for no one wanting a liar working for them, that goes both ways. I once gave up a very good job because I didn't want to work for a liar and didn't want to do their lying for them. Friends and family applauded me for that but at the end of the day you still have bills to pay and you are unemployed. How commendable is that? Earned me no points.

[Simon Dog]

Obtaining a job by deception is not only grounds for dismissal, it is also a criminal offence! I'm not firing him for a disability, I'm fireing him for being a dishonest, lying , piece of s***! No one wants one of those working for them.

Perhaps you are not from the US, and do not understand how the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) works.  I can assure you that if you fired someone in the US for failure to disclose they had a disability prior to hiring, they would likely not have to worry about the job because they would be extracting a large cash settlement from your company.  Your declaration that you consider them a liar for not volunteering the info will not be accepted as a defense by any court handing an ADA case in the US.   It would be like "He did not tell me he was Jewish, and I don't mind Jews, but I don't want a liar who did not mention that prior to working for me".

Here is a simple logic exercise.  If US Federal law prevents an employer from asking about something, would logic dictate that the prospective employee could be penalized for not volunteering that info at the interview?

Another condition that enjoys similar protection is pregnancy for employers with at least 15 employees.   An employer cannot ask about pregnancy or plans for pregnancy, not can it penalize a candidate for not volunteering that info.  (this is covered by the PDA, not the ADA).

The issue is not what you think is right, but what the law specifies.   You are either from a place where US law does not apply, or do not have a clue how US employment law works.

Here in the USA a potential employer cannot ask about disabilities during an interview.

Bingo, though there is a "are you or have you been disabled" form used for govt reporting.  The companies I have seen that use this separate the form and it is not seen, or used, but hiring managers.

[Michael Murphy]

Realize if a applicant is eligible for or on Medicare the enormous expenses are reduced by a factor of 5. 

[Simon Dog]

Realize if a applicant is eligible for or on Medicare the enormous expenses are reduced by a factor of 5.

Much more than that.

Not only does Medicare pay 4/5 if the expenses, but they do so at a Medicare rate that is often a fraction of the private insurance price and a fraction of a fraction of the private pay price.

My surgeon billed about $8K for the xplant and $1K for prepping the kidney.  He was paid at the Medicare rate of about $2100 for both.

Dialysis was about $450 insurance; $3000 - $5000 out of town insured price; $300 Medicare price.

[fightingPKD]

Sorry for the necro (new here) but I just had to say to the OP, that is some bullshit.  Was he able to land on his feet eventually? I hope so.

I am honestly worried of this kind of situation coming up for me if I ever leave my current job - fear actually getting hired for another one.  The organization I work for now definitely won't lay me off, but I mean...if they did...I'd feel screwed.  Never mind that employers aren't exactly looking for older candidates with families to begin with...

[PrimeTimer]

Sorry for the necro (new here) but I just had to say to the OP, that is some bullshit.  Was he able to land on his feet eventually? I hope so.

I am honestly worried of this kind of situation coming up for me if I ever leave my current job - fear actually getting hired for another one.  The organization I work for now definitely won't lay me off, but I mean...if they did...I'd feel screwed.  Never mind that employers aren't exactly looking for older candidates with families to begin with...

My husband's new employer doesn't seem to mind his dialysis, thanks for asking fightingPKD!
He works M-F and does the 5:30am dialysis shift on Tues, Thur and SAT. He's usually done with dialysis by 10:30am and depending on his work assignments, goes straight to work or comes home for lunch. He prefers that schedule because it affects his work the least. He just passed his probationary period as a new-hire so now we see what kind of insurance plans they offer. Hopefully his new employer is not "self-insured" like his last one was. Altho we had Aetna, come to find out they (Aetna) were simply in-charge of handling the paperwork but the employer was the one paying the claims (we had paid the bulk of the premiums and co-pays). Read about self-insured companies. This is quite different from the traditional way most large employers do it. So when my husband cost his employer too much in claims they simply got rid of him. He was one of their top employees in the nation but yet....they couldn't afford him. That was a clue...read farther down...

Regardless of age, just because Medicare starts paying 80% of dialysis (I think after the first 30 months and if you sign up for it) does not mean a self-insured employer wants to pay the remaining 20%. My husband was paying to have 2 insurance policies only to essentially be dropped (fired) by his employer who was doing the "self-insured" thing. We hope his new employer isn't doing that and is operating in a more traditional way.

  BTW, his former employer made recent headlines. As we had suspected, seems they have screwed some customers and are in big legal trouble now. Doesn't always pay to cut corners...Am soooo glad hubby is no longer working for them! Whew! A blessing in disguise alright! And he's making more money with his new employer. Clients are still finding out that he's no longer with his old company and calling. His new employer ought to like the business he's bringing in. His former employer is probably kicking themselves.