No per the ADA only 3rd class licenses 1st class jumbo jet licenses are still restricted "but may not obtain first class certification, which allows the pilot to operate large commercial planes. "
Acidrock - it is only common decency - I have had to let go many good employees working in a cylical industry and these people need referrals to help find new work - anyhow I still think its wimpy of major corps to cow tow to the legal fears - I still think that we would be a lot better off w less lawyers. It seems to be so many peoples first reaction when they are harmed is to sue sue sue. Even in this case where no harm was done, the individual got the job and hopefully will thrive but look at the number of people that want to sue!. We need to pick our battles carefully.
I agree with Dick. It is not going to take much time out of a managers day to spend a few minutes on the phone giving a reference or writing up a letter. References open up doors that might not otherwise be opened for people - try getting a job without them. It is one thing when you fired a person for good reason but when you are letting people go because of the economy, there is no reason not to give them a reference.
As far as the “if you are good” statement, anyone can write anything on a resume but most people want to verify what you say is true. I have been on the verify end of things and found out people that claimed ex-bosses thought they walked on water were lying.
The only time I ever got a job without using references was when I sent my resume to a company that the company I was leaving had a relationship with. I had talked with the president of the new company before sending my resume to him & he had an extreme dislike for the new president of the old company - him hiring me was a way to sock it to her & I got the job easily.
That same old companies president decided to fire one of the employees in my department without consulting me - she just did not like him. I went against her wishes & wrote up a reference for him and gave him my home phone number to use for a reference.
It looks like the summary on the ADA site was accurate - From the FAA site it says The FAA has established a policy that permits the special issuance medical certification of insulin-treated applicants for third-class medical certification. Consideration will be given only to those individuals who have been clinically stable on their current treatment regimen for a period of 6 months or more. Consideration is not being given for first- or second-class certification.
Yes but if you dont list a reference from last employer, it will raise a red flag!!
Different law applies in Canada …I agree with Canadian Linda …Copied and pasted from www.peoplewithdiabetes.ca …if you like to read the complete story .
Trailblazer in the Sky
His passion was flying airplanes. It still is.
Here is the remarkable story of Stephen Steele, a Canadian trailblazer who became the first Type I diabetic airline captain in the world.
He grew up knowing that the only thing he wanted to do was fly. At 16, he got his student pilot permit, and by 17 he had his private pilot’s license. At 21, he got hired by Air Canada and thought he was living the dream…until one day, 8 years later, he was forced to surrender his pilot’s license due to a diagnosis of Type I, insulin-dependent diabetes.
The landmark court case…
Guidelines for flying…
It took a couple of months to stabilize the diabetes, but meanwhile, Stephen had lost his job and was told he’d never fly again. Faced with this new reality and the need to find a new career, Stephen headed for law school and spent the next 5 years getting his law degree and opening his own law practice. During that time, however, he never lost his “spark” for flying and managed to stay on part-time with Air Canada as a simulator instructor, teaching pilots to fly the DC-9 aircraft.
Juggling both careers proved to be enormously time-consuming, however, so eventually he had to make a choice. Stephen knew that his heart was always in aviation, so he jumped at an opportunity to be a flight simulator instructor for Cathay-Pacific Airways and packed up his wife and two sons and moved to Hong Kong. The opportunities and experiences he and his family shared throughout their 8 years in Asia went beyond what they could have imagined, and little did they know how much the aviation field would change over the course of that time.
Watch & listen to the first video clip on the right as Stephen tells the story of how he got his chance to get back in the cockpit.
Stephen uses an insulin pump to control his blood sugars, and he tests his blood 14-15x daily when he is flying, and 6-7x when he isn’t flying. He must stay on top of his health in order to live his dream and to ensure that all of his passengers remain safe in his care. Transport Canada makes sure of that, as the rules for pilots with Type I diabetes are very strict. Click on the second video on the right to hear Stephen speak about the kinds of guidelines and criteria that pilots with Type I diabetes must meet.
Next…
Page 1 2
Proudly sponsored by:
contact us about us privacy policy sitemap copyright © 2006 People With Diabetes Holdings Inc.
Lynn, I question your contention that either of the employers did anything “illegal” here.
See this reference: LINK HERE
Let’s assume that the previous employer did not find about Emily’s diabetes through a confidential health-test - it undoubtedly came up in the course of everyday life, like excusing oneself to shoot up when going out to lunch together or declining to eat someone’s birthday cake. So let’s take that as a given - that the employer found out about Emily’s diabetes in the course of everyday work life.
Now when the new employer calls to ask about Emily’s work, are you saying that the previous employer is constrained from discussing something about Emily that he knows and that he found out in a non-confidential way? Can you give the law reference number for the violation you’re suggesting?
Your employer disclosed medical information? That is a violation of HIPPA. Get yourself a lawyer. There are all kind of claims here. Your medical information is yours alone to disclose as you see fit. It is illegal for that kind of disclosure to be made, and given the chance it might have affected your ability to retain gainful employment, this could have been a lot uglier for you than it was.
Your former employer had no business, no right, and a fiduciary duty to NOT disclose any of your medical information. I’m shocked. The dude violated federal privacy laws.
HIPPA reaches pretty far. My partner and I worked in the same company for several years. We are actually married and I still had to have him give me a HIPPA release to discuss anything to do with his employment or health care situation. The fact that one employer told another prospective employer is pretty sketchy. He may know what he knows, but he hasn’t been given authorization to disclose what he/she knows…
As a middle manager, I agree with the above. I know a great deal about my subordinates’ health and personal circumstances, simply as a function of having to approve their time off when they need medical attention. It is extremely clear to me, by virtue of the HIPAA disclosures I’ve seen and the training I was given by HR, that I cannot and should not discuss these factors with ANYONE unless the employee gives me authorization to do so, and I try to be scrupulous about that, even with my own boss. So yeah… I think Pete’s right.
NO, Pete that is just plain wrong. The employer did not disclose confidential medical information - they discussed information that Emily had made public. If she hadn’t made it public, then her boss wouldn’t have known it. Please see my link in the previous post I made above.
Lynne, I’m willing to agree with you if you can prove that you are correct. But without something to prove your case, I don’t see it. What do you base this statement on: “If an employer knows something about an employee that’s medically related, it’s confidential, period.”?
When I searched on this a couple web sites had similiar cases and seemed to indicate that unless it was release of medical records that while it is inappropriate, its not illegal. I did not record the web sites sorry. But regardless, there was no harm and while we all agree it should not have been done, why does everyone want to sue?
Sounds like a release of Protected Health Information to me. But I’m no lawyer.
from the reading i have done if the previous employer found the information from medical records or medical insurance or thru the hiring process, it is protected information. If the employer became aware of it thru the normal course of employment, then it may or may not be protected information. Don’t you just love our legal system - clear as mud!!
no I think you are wrong even the ada sight mentions how information was found out as to weather it is protected info or not. If it was in the general course of employment - perhaps in a casual conversation, it may or may not be protected. Hippa requires oganizations that handle medical records and most employers dont directly handle the records - so I do believe (but could be wrong) that it may or may not be protected Info. Regardless in this case does it matter? She got the job - Congrats!!
Lynne,
Thanks for sharing your knowledge & expertise as an HR executive. Everything you’ve written clearly shows Emily’s right to confidentiality was violated. Thanks also for your patience:)
No, she’s right. Employers have all kinds of personal medical information within their control. If you have a benefits department, they know what’s up with you. Unless you give express WRITTEN consent to disclosure of your medical information, in the position of employer/manager/direct report he had an obligation to not disclose any personal medical information. How he knows is not important, as I said before.
The following link to a “fact sheet” is provided by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In summary, the EEOC states:
"Although not everyone who has diabetes has a disability as defined by the ADA, it is in the employer’s best interest to try to work with employees who have diabetes, or are at risk for the disease, to help improve productivity, decrease absenteeism, and generally promote healthier lifestyles. Employers also should avoid policies or practices that categorically exclude people with diabetes from certain jobs and, instead, should assess each applicant’s and employee’s ability to perform a particular job with or without reasonable accommodation."
Disclaimer: The following link is provided for informational purposes only. It is not to be construed as legal advice. If you have questions, please consult with an attorney or legal professional in your state,
Source: http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/diabetes.html
Good to have experts willing to set the record straight. Hugs back.