What would you do if an employee approached you and said they could no longer work around paint fumes?
A woman lost her job as a production association for a decorative paint company after complaining that the paint was making her sick. Now she’s suing.
The worker had been diagnosed with symptoms of COPD and asthma as early 2016. She worked for three years at the paint facility.
Typically, her job was in the “re-work” department at the company. Her main role entailed removing blemished parts from the production line and sanding them down so they could be repainted.
Occasionally, the worker was called upon to help out in other areas of the plant with greater exposure to paint fumes, but only for a few hours at a time.
In February 2020, she took FMLA leave to undergo a medical procedure unrelated to her eventual breathing problems. Then Covid hit.
When she was finally able to return to work, there was a personnel shortage, so she was assigned to work the paint line for long periods of time. This put her uncomfortably close to the painting oven and its fumes.
The first day, she experienced shortness of breath and difficulty breathing. That afternoon, she had a telehealth visit where the doctor certified that she should not be working around paint fumes due to her asthma.
The worker presented her medical note to HR but it didn’t garner sympathy. Instead, the bosses said her presence in the facility was a liability due to her potential for illness.
The worker skipped the next two days of work. At that point, the company backdated her absences as “unexcused” and summarily fired her.
In response, the worker sued. She claimed the company had violated the law by failing to accommodate her disability.
The company, in contrast, asserted that the worker’s duties as a production assistant including shifting to whatever position in the plant needed support. Additionally, the company pointed out that every area of the facility had some exposure to paint fumes.
The case continued to wind its way through court on appeal until this week, when it is finally is going before a jury.
The case bears watching as a coal-mine canary for possible exposure to disability claims for painting contractors.
After all, if the jury finds that being exposed to paint fumes at a paint company is a form of disability discrimination, then any painter with asthma could potentially do the same.
While the legal jury has yet to return a verdict, the court of public opinion is open. Do you think the disability claim for paint fumes is a reasonable case? How would you react if one of your employees tried to make the same case?
7 Responses
You can work anywhere, so don’t work at a paint company. It’s the employee that has the problem not the company. Don’t blame others for your own problems… See probably smokes now or has in the past.
Seems to me like the she experience many things that effected her breathing including COVID and did she wear a respirator? Also she left so there is no idea of what she may have been exposed to after. I am sure it all has contributed to her illness over the years, but in the end, I do not think the paint company has full responsibility, but they may have some limited exposure. Very curious to hear about the outcome on this.
No. She had COPD and asthma and never should have got a job in a paint facility. I would require her work position to wear a respirator. The paint did not cause her medical conditions. The paint fumes might irritate her already stressed-out respiratory system but didn’t cause the problem. If she can’t wear a respirator then she needs to find a different job.
I don’t know hunk the company should be responsible for her health problems,She already knew about her health issues,She should let the company know that She has a asthma problems and then may be the company would put in anything else than be close to paint,But I don’t think she even let know her boss about it,sorry but I don’t believe company should be responsible
She knew she had asthma she should have known better to work where paint fumes bothered her she should have looked for work else where now if company didn’t care and had her work where they were aware she had issues then that falls on the company they should have known thus prior
Firstly I would not hire someone who had her disability, if we used oil based paints. Since we have changed our company to 98% water base and less toxic coatings using someone who has breathing issues could possibly work for us. In our world where individuals assume no responsibility (why would she ever work for a paint manufacturing company) and when something goes wrong always blame someone or something else other than themselves.
I was on the tools for 30 years and have a very low tolerance for chemical smells now, and feel ill just getting a whiff of solvent based paint. Should be a workers comp claim, because she was fired it’s now a lawsuit.