Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Mexico Employer Refuses to allow work with limitations New Mexico

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Mexico Employer Refuses to allow work with limitations New Mexico

    I'm working for a New Mexico County Government agency that refuses to allow me to work with a TEMPORARY Dr. Restriction. I work in an office and would be able to do 98% of my duties as described on my job description and 100% of my actual normal office duties. The ONE item on my job description is that I must be able to lift up to 48 lbs for up to 15 times in a day. The entire time I've worked in that office, I have NEVER had to actually do any lifting like that.

    So I had planned a surgery (medically necessary surgery not just a cosmetic procedure) and my Immediate supervisor is totally fine with allowing me to work with a restriction, BUT the HR person tells me that I have to be 100% cleared to return to work on ALL of my job description duties EVEN If I don't normally perform that duty. The HR person and the County manager both tell me that if the DR does not clear me 100% ( which will be aproximately 6 total weeks) That I cannot come back to work even if I can still do 100% of my normal daily duties but cannot do the 1 thing that is listed on my job description that I've never done since I started working there.

    Can the employer legally bar me from working with a restriction even if that restriction is not something I normally do on a daily basis anyway?
    What are my legal courses of action to deal with this issue?
    Last edited by Hobo14; 10-04-2008, 03:49 PM.

  • #2
    Yes. They can.
    The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

    Comment


    • #3
      under what law?
      And why would the state of NM and Federal agencies have a different ruling? Both the state and the Feds allow an employee to work on limited duty.

      For example two years ago when I worked for the BLM as a wildland firefighter, I had lasix surgery on my eyes and was limited from doing my job by not being allowed to be in the smoke or dust for two weeks. The BLM gave me different jobs that didn't involve smoke or dust for those two weeks. This time I don't even need different job tasks. I can do all the main job tasks I normally do. I just won't be able to lift anything heavier than like 5-10 lbs for 4-6 weeks. But I also don't normally even lift that much weight on a daily basis at work in the first place.


      Originally posted by cbg View Post
      Yes. They can.
      Last edited by Hobo14; 10-04-2008, 05:17 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        They can do it because there is no law that says they can't.
        The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

        Comment


        • #5
          Actually it is illegal because they are allowing two other workers with office positions to work with medical restritions and refusing mine.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hobo14 View Post
            Actually it is illegal because they are allowing two other workers with office positions to work with medical restritions and refusing mine.

            Well, no, that doesn't make it illegal. There is no law that says that every employee with medical restrictions must be accommodated. And if the restrictions are a result of an on-the-job injury, it is in the employer's best interest to get that employee back to work ASAP and work with the restrictions.
            Last edited by Pattymd; 10-06-2008, 12:08 PM.
            I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.

            Comment


            • #7
              Actually there Is I just found it. If they allow two other workers with the Same or similar job descritions to be allowed termporarymedical restritions, they have to allow all employees the same restritions or else it is descrimination. To allow the other two employees with similar job descriptions to work under restrictions and to deny the third is considered deiscrimination.


              Voluntary Accommodation
              Must Be Applied Uniformly

              The issue of fairness comes up
              when an employer voluntarily elects to
              accommodate non-pregnant employees’
              temporary medical restrictions. When
              an employer does that, the employer
              must also accommodate pregnant employees’
              temporary medical restrictions
              exactly the same.
              An employer must treat pregnant
              employees the same as
              non-pregnant employees.
              Pregnant employees with
              temporary lifting restrictions
              imposed by their physicians
              due to pregnancy must be
              given light duty if nonpregnant
              employees with temporary
              lifting restrictions imposed
              by their physicians are
              given light duty.
              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS,
              TENTH CIRCUIT, 2000
              .

              If they " Accomate the Pregnant workers" but dont accomadate the non pregnant worker the same it is basically the reverse of the above descritions and is still descrimination.
              Last edited by Hobo14; 10-06-2008, 12:47 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Are you pregnant? You didn't mention that if you are.
                The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cbg View Post
                  Are you pregnant? You didn't mention that if you are.
                  Pregnancy throws a whole 'nuther law into the mix. If you are pregnant, it would have been helpful to know that.
                  I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X