Skip to main content

Posting Confidential Medical Related Information About An Employee on Facebook? Beware of ADA Violations


Shoun v. Best Formed Plastics, Inc. - US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division


Facts:  George Shoun injured his shoulder in March 2012 while on the job at Best Formed Plastics and spent several months off recovering.  Jane Stewart, who processed the worker's compensation claim for the company, prepared an accident report and monitored Shoun's medical treatment.  In February 2013, Stewart apparently posted a message on her Facebook page:

  • "Isn't [it] amazing how Jimmy experienced a 5 way heart bypass just one month ago and is back to work, especially when you consider George Shoun's shoulder injury kept him away from work for 11 months and now he is trying to sue us."

Stewart's Facebook page was apparently linked to her business e-mail address and was available to the business communities in northeastern Indiana and southern Michigan.  Stewart's statement remained on her Facebook page for 76 days.

Shoun subsequently brought suit against Best for violating the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") and alleged Stewart, on behalf of Best, wrongfully disclosed confidential information about his medical condition to other people via the Facebook post.  Best filed a motion to dismiss Shoun's suit.

Holding:  To start, the ADA requires that any information relating to a medical condition of an employee obtained by an employer during "voluntary medical examinations, including voluntary work histories, which are part of an employee health program available to employees at that work site" must be "collected and maintained on separate forms and in separate medical files and [be] treated as a confidential medical record."

In this instance, Best argued that Shoun voluntarily and publically disclosed his medical condition in the complaint he filed in Superior Court before Stewart's alleged disclosure of the same information.  Shoun filed his state complaint on February 14, 2013 and Stewart's Facebook post came five days afterward.  While the Court noted the strength of this argument, the Court pointed to the fact that Shoun had alleged that Stewart acquired the information about Shoun's medical condition through an employment related medical inquiry and then wrongfully disclosed that information.  The Court held that whether Stewart gained this knowledge of Shoun's medical condition solely within the context of the employment related medical examination is a question of fact that is not appropriate for resolution via a motion to dismiss.

Judgment:  The District Court denied Best's motion to dismiss and held that Shoun had set out facts sufficient to allege a violation of the confidentiality provisions of the ADA.

The Takeaway:  I cannot say it enough, work related information, including any thoughts, comments, opinions, etc. need to be kept off Facebook.  It is one thing to post a picture of your trip to the beach or a status update on what your favorite movie is.  It is another thing to voice an opinion and disclose medical related information about an employee on Facebook and risk violating the ADA.

Good rule of thumb:  If in doubt, do not post it.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Miller, Jr.

Date:  June 23, 2014

Opinion:  http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1767&context=historical

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more