Employee who refused vaccine loses ADA case
As a health care worker on a COVID team, Margaret was in the thick of things at the beginning of the pandemic. She was required to undergo daily temperature checks and wear a mask. Margaret felt like such policies reflected that she was considered a continual health risk.
Employee foregoes vaccine
In early 2021, she told her colleagues that she did not intend to get the COVID vaccine, and she felt that the company policies were discriminatory as they did not allow for medical accommodations. She also refused to administer the vaccine (that she deemed “experimental”) to patients, arguing it was her ethical duty to do so. In response, she was put on leave.
When Margaret returned to work, she was still required to undergo temperature checks and weekly testing because she was not vaccinated. She felt this, too, was discriminatory.
Soon thereafter, she claimed that the policies violated her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Particularly, she argued she was being regarded as having an infectious disease without an individualized assessment.
During a discussion with HR, Margaret was told that if she did not receive the vaccine by a certain date, she would face an unpaid suspension and eventual termination. She did not receive the vaccine and was suspended. She returned to work the next month, but was required to test every week. She argued that there was no individual assessment to deem her a direct threat under the ADA. She was again told to get the vaccine (she didn’t) or face termination (she did).
Employee files suit
Margaret filed suit, still claiming that the company policies discriminated against her by:
- Denying her access to her workplace,
- Classifying her as unvaccinated, and
- Suspending her employment,
All due to the company’s perception of her as a person with a disability.
The employer asked that the case be dismissed, arguing that the ADA didn’t apply to Margaret because COVID is not a disability, and that the policies were not discriminatory or retaliatory.
Employee’s claim fails
The court indicated that Margaret’s claim that the company regarded her as disabled with a contagious disease, as well as impaired immune and respiratory systems failed. In fact, the court said being regarded as having an impairment does not apply to conditions that are transitory and minor, meaning conditions are expected to last six months or more to qualify for regarded-as protections.
While long COVID can be a disability, most COVID cases last fewer than 20 days, so they would not be disabilities. Therefore, being perceived as having COVID is also not protected by the ADA.
Margaret’s claim that the employer “made a record of [her] disability” by misclassifying her as “substantially limited with impaired immune and respiratory systems affecting her ability to perform major life activities in the workplace,” also failed. She could not show that he had a history of a disability or was misclassified as having a disability. A record that an employee has a condition that is not a disability does not satisfy the ADA.
Lundstrom v. Contra Costa Health Services, Northern District of California, No. 22-cv-6227, November 29, 2022.
Key to remember: While long COVID can be a disability, regular infection that is brief is not. Being fired for foregoing a required vaccine does not establish that an employer regards an employee as having an impairment.