Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Covidien Sued By Samuelson, Wilson and Roe for Disability Discrimination

Claimant states that Covidien violated ADA by discriminating against a disabled person.

“The ADA prohibits discrimination based solely upon an individual’s disability and was enacted to protect employees or potential employees right not to be subjected to harmful and unfounded stereotypes based upon a perceived or actual disability.”

San Jose, CA (PRWEB) January 28, 2010 -- Covidien, formerly Tyco Healthcare, with revenue in excess of 10 billion dollars in 2008 and 41,000 employees worldwide in 59 countries, discriminated against and refused to hire a potential employee based solely on the fact that he has a disability, according to charges in a lawsuit filed under California’s version of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), by Samuelson, Wilson & Roe. Case number #109CV158423 was filed on December 1, 2009 in the Santa Clara County Superior Court, in San Jose, California.

The lawsuit alleges VNUS Medical Technologies, purchased and owned by Covidien, refused to hire a top-level executive after discovering that the executive is a recovering alcoholic. Instead, VNUS/Covidien, refused to hire the Claimant based solely on the discovery that he was a recovering alcoholic.

The ADA (and its California counterpart) provides protection for people with disabilities such as Alcoholism. The following are pertinent points of the law:

 
  • Alcoholism. Alcoholism is a disability covered by the ADA. This means that an employer cannot fire, refuse to hire or discipline a worker simply because he is an alcoholic. However, an employer can fire or discipline an alcoholic worker for failing to meet work-related performance and behavior standards imposed on all employees -- even if the worker fails to meet these standards because of his drinking.
  • Illegal Drug Use. The ADA does not protect employees who currently use or are addicted to illegal drugs. These workers are not considered "disabled" within the meaning of the law, and therefore don't have the right to be free from discrimination or to receive a reasonable accommodation; however, the ADA does cover workers who are no longer using drugs and have successfully completed (or are currently participating in) a supervised drug rehabilitation program.
  • Use of Legal Drugs. If an employee is taking prescription medication or over-the-counter drugs to treat a disability, you may have to accommodate that employee’s use of drugs and the side effects that the drugs have on the employee. However, you are not required to accommodate legal drug use if you cannot find a reasonable accommodation.

San Jose Employment attorney, Charles Roe, who represents the Plaintiff, stated that “the ADA prohibits discrimination based solely upon an individual’s disability and was enacted to protect employees or potential employees right not to be subjected to harmful and unfounded stereotypes based upon a perceived or actual disability.”

Furthermore, he goes on to state that “compelling evidence exists that Covidien/VNUS refused to hire my client as an employee based solely on the discovery that he was a recovering alcoholic. We will demonstrate and thus vigorously enforce the ADA’s prohibition of an employer who unfairly excludes a person from jobs that they could otherwise perform, based solely on the fact of their disability.”

Covidien’s website states, with regard to discrimination, that “silence doesn’t help. It hurts.” Additionally, in its mission statement, the company states that it enters “into our relationships with a sense of honesty, fairness and trust.” Further information regarding EEOC and disability claims can be found at www.eeoc.gov.

See Also:

[Via Legal / Law]

No comments: