MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Indigo Nights <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:00:19 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (122 lines)
It's also a sad fact of work life that, once you're
"locked out", so to speak, and have a disability that
affects the brain, you're sometimes thought of as
spooky and lacking credibility.

It's very noble to think one can educate an employer. 
In some instances, true, it can be done, though that
usually needs to be done before there is "an
incident."  I will give you that this could be a great
opportunity for an employer to learn, but the employer
has to want to learn. One that has locked out someone
with a disability--again, without having a clearly
defined policy on such matters in place, doing this
only on whim--most probably isn't going to want to
learn.

After all, everybody thinks they are right (hardest
lesson in the world for me to learn--they can't be
right, I am (LOL)).  

Here we have an employee disadvantaged.  On the
outside, sick time--if any--running toward expiration,
having to find the resources to bring this information
to the forefront to redeem his/her job while life goes
on for the employer.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a wake up call.  If
you're institution isn't where it needs to be on such
matters as the ADA, it's time to get there FAST.  The
law was put in place in 1990.

Further, to make inquiries about the employee's health
circumstances (come back when you can guarantee you
won't ever have another seizure) most probably
violates the requirements of HIPAA (the Health
Insurance Portability Accountabilty Act
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/).

There are caveats to some of the laws having to do
with the size of the institution or the body for which
one is working (government).  But ignorance of the law
is no excuse.  

No matter how harried or taxed your organization is,
no matter how poorly stretched the resources, it is
your fiduciary responsibility to ensure your
organization is in compliance with the laws--all of
them, not the least of which is HR--that govern you.  

My life circumstances are such that I have a couple of
disabilities (ADHD, with which I was born, and
arthritis, which I acquired in the last year--among
others).  In a nonhostile work environment, I can
openly and honestly educate my employer about my
disabilities, the need for accommodation, etc., and I
do.  

But in a hostile situation such as the poster's, where
the person is on the outside and their livelihood is
potentially threatened, sometimes the only way to
educate the employer is by pulling some of the same
power they have attempted to pull on you.  They
presume you are ignorant of the laws and/or are
ignorant themselves.  They are in a position of
superior power and have responsibilities commensurate
with that power.

Employment law cases are usually brought by people on
the disadvantaged side of the economic spectrum (the
employee) who don't have the resources the companies
do.  Employment-law attorneys are harder to come by. 
For most, protecting your rights requires that you
become savvy in this regard.  

A few years ago, I had cause to file a grievance with
the EEOC over a disability issue.  I know from
experience it is not easy, but sometimes must be done.
 It was only after a long, difficult struggle that I
filed with the EEOC and eventually "resolved my
differences" with my employer to my satisfaction.  

It's amazing to me how ignorant people can be when it
comes to HR law in this simply litigious society.  We
litigate that which we cannot negotiate, and if folks
won't negotiate or things are nonnegotiable, there is
no other option except to suck it up and walk away.  

If this were a traffic matter, do you really think you
could escape a ticket by saying, "Oops, I didn't
know?"  It most instances, you cannot.

Ok, I'm off my soapbox.  In my case, I left a company
I had worked for for 24 years.  Am I better off now? 
You betcha.

P.S.  I just hope the offending organization is on
this list and is paying attention.


--- Diane Gutenkauf <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> It is a sad fact of American life that very, very
> few museum workers are
> represented by trade unions. It is highly unlikely
> that the original
> poster is a union member.
> 
> Would that it were different....
> 
> Diane G.
>

Indigo Nights
[log in to unmask]

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2