“Sono stato punito per non aver detto al mio capo della mia disabilità”
di OGSyedIsEverywhere
“Sono stato punito per non aver detto al mio capo della mia disabilità”
di OGSyedIsEverywhere
9 commenti
So they didn’t tell them about it which means that they don’t get the legal protection
I don’t really understand this article, it feels like they haven’t given the full information here. There isn’t a requirement to disclose a physical/mental illness to an employer, but you won’t be able to request reasonable adjustments as the employer would have no way of knowing. You can’t lie, but I don’t know why her job would require her to confirm she didn’t have a mental illness?
The employer terminating her for “lying” about a mental illness seems to be completely contrary to equality law, the employer had no right to know that information unless they had a lawful reason for doing so, which doesnt seem to be the case from how it was described.
I highly doubt this is a truthful account of the situation.
Note I am aware employers can “sometimes” dismiss an employee for lying about having a physical or mental health condition, but it opens them up to significant risk if the condition is a “disability” and they haven’t acted “reasonably”. The decision to dismiss is based on “dishonesty”, but the employer needs to have a good reason why they require this health information from employees.
Employer can legally dismiss someone if a medical condition wasn’t disclosed to them which prevents the worker from being able to do their job.
Work coaches actively tell people to hide disabilities and deny any barriers to work
It’s really difficult because being open and honest about your disability and needs at a job just feels like you’re being a nuisance and management and HR treat you like a burden and other, but you do get the safety net of reasonable adjustments etc however I remember being on UC for a couple months just after Covid and the work coach would always say to not tell the job / interviewers about any disabilities or adjustments needed because they’ll just not hire you so then you’re stuck feeling like a liar who can’t speak up about their needs.
Employers don’t seem to realise that not everyone is aware of the disability they were born with. Things such as ADHD and Autism may be diagnosed after an employee starts a role.
This is the kind of bullshit of the system as it exists. Yes, it’s illegal to fire someone for disability in this way, but the actual consequences for businesses aren’t there. People with disability are vulnerable to start with. They are less in a position to fight for their basic lawful rights. And in the case of mental illness, the stress of fighting simply is too often not worth the result.
So, despite what the law says you are stuck either to not mention it and hope it doesn’t get too bad and you can get by, or you do mention it and risk not getting hired or getting fired or getting treated in a way that makes working unsustainable.
If the government really wants to reduce how much it pays in disability payments, then they might well start by taking the burden of enforcement off the victims.
Maybe yet another issue that would be greatly improved by higher levels of union membership.
Maybe it’s the ad stuff that breaks up articles on sites like the Metro but don’t see anything about this individual concurrently seeking professional advice regarding this ‘disability’ OR taking proscribed medication to mitigate the symptoms.
Anyone who’s done counselling will attest they, unfortunately, come into contact (quite frequently) with clients who are just about keeping a lid on things because the meds fuck their routine up.
Not enough info in the article. Sounds like an office job, but could also have been working with children. Who knows.
I don’t understand how them having a phychosis episode where apparently nobody at the job would have known it was happening, unravelled into someone googling them and finding a phychosis article. Was that someone random googling, or did something happen that they’re not telling us prompting the other person to google them?
Also they could have just been on a one-month probation and the HR meeting was a rejection of permanent employment. I dunno just seems fishy.